Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190703001842.12238-1-alistair.francis@wdc.com>
 <20190703001842.12238-3-alistair.francis@wdc.com> <CAK8P3a37GLzp+w6m0SEV+9j_6sH91SuStyAEW-VzuJ5_dUCnZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKmqyKP07futGV1WsZwvqGzeR646eo-ysVy9RCqaSOG-2qhH_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK8P3a1zJPiR06uxZ5QVoEyDU64v=oUu_p9X-mULLeXN-som8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKmqyKMtsQaq9DpfPY=T0pixrH2sntewDz42dTvD5rDcK+ZV0w@mail.gmail.com> <CAK8P3a36CXf+HGgL=nNYzc-1Qhh=tu6to0opwYjO4fO5KDxUDA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a36CXf+HGgL=nNYzc-1Qhh=tu6to0opwYjO4fO5KDxUDA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Jul 2019 15:55:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKmqyKMx8JqGw7uhUO5pDkgyRDCixv6TXPCZUSHrAu8efZNBRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] riscv/include/uapi: Define a custom __SIGINFO struct
 for RV32
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc:     Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>,
        linux-riscv-bounces@lists.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 1:34 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 12:18 AM Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:47 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 8:45 PM Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > What I don't understand though is how that impacted this struct, it
> > > > doesn't use clock_t at all, everything in the struct is an int or
> > > > void*.
> > >
> > > si_utime/si_stime in siginfo are clock_t.
> >
> > But they are further down the struct. I just assumed that GCC would
> > align those as required, I guess it aligns the start of the struct to
> > match some 64-bit members which seems strange.
>
> These are the regular struct alignment rules. Essentially you would
> get something like
>
> struct s {
>     int a;
>     int b;
>     int c;
>     union {
>          int d;
>          long long e;
>    };
>    int f;
> };
>
> Since 'e' has 8 byte alignment, the same is true for the union,
> and putting the union in a struct also requires the same alignment
> for the struct itself, so now you get padding after 'c' and 'f'.

Now that I think about it more it does make sense. Thanks for the help
with this and all the glibc stuff.

I have a new patch set that seems to work on RV32 and RV64. I'm now
hitting issues with syscalls that glibc doesn't use but other projects
do like io_getevents in OpenSSL.

Alistair

>
>        Arnd