Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 10:11:43 -0800 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r357695 - in head: sys/kern sys/sys usr.bin/procstat Message-ID: <d04de408-be97-9405-b77d-d5f4cfdb248d@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <202002091210.019CAciS006085@repo.freebsd.org> References: <202002091210.019CAciS006085@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2/9/20 4:10 AM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > Author: kib > Date: Sun Feb 9 12:10:37 2020 > New Revision: 357695 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/357695 > > Log: > Add AT_BSDFLAGS auxv entry. > > The intent is to provide bsd-specific flags relevant to interpreter > and C runtime. I did not want to reuse AT_FLAGS which is common ELF > auxv entry. > > Use bsdflags to report kernel support for sigfastblock(2). This > allows rtld and libthr to safely infer the syscall presence without > SIGSYS. The tunable kern.elf{32,64}.sigfastblock blocks reporting. > > Tested by: pho > Disscussed with: cem, emaste, jilles > Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation > Differential revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12773 I find adding a new auxv type curious. The MIPS ABI doc says that "bits under the 0xff000000 mask are reserved for system semantics". The powerpc and x86-64 docs don't define any bits at all. In practice I think we are free to use AT_FLAGS however we wish as no use cases of "standard" bits have arisen since AT_FLAGS was first defined. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d04de408-be97-9405-b77d-d5f4cfdb248d>