From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "H.J. Lu" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] nptl: Update struct pthread_unwind_buf Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2018 04:53:11 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20180201205757.51911-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <4abf9786-1879-f16c-5a01-3261cd718d63@redhat.com> <87inb7pug7.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <2a02aac9-6aa3-4dc6-b122-039ae85365e8@redhat.com> <87d11emoap.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <878tc2mkgr.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <90d3ee18-c292-117f-a0c1-7822e340ca02@redhat.com> <87a7vyjsqv.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <87vaelbetu.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <87fu5pb7ql.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1519563079 28927 195.159.176.226 (25 Feb 2018 12:51:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2018 12:51:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" , GNU C Library To: Florian Weimer Original-X-From: libc-alpha-return-90559-glibc-alpha=m.gmane.org@sourceware.org Sun Feb 25 13:51:15 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: glibc-alpha@blaine.gmane.org DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=S/xQ B4WXjEiT7yuaExzlShwedSDY31AjGBY8lBejQmeZot/Lj6ZzR9YnPZorHbD4RnBs Qj4swuPU8NUpNs6dQJZ3o9fzAKePnPNUMe37WD8C12X05x2+K1mski8Wbcy3qaaH U/qNQ36YwSOUErOxQtp/dfIRJajb9L1nJcwsisg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; s=default; bh=bYcrfMKRfP vNLTmmMweL5MVYPJE=; b=FwLJGAJ9flt3MXnmQm+bRPJLSCAqBTfFThN+QcIMoI F31sqxWgRtKNVOVR136Fmd8POxpr/hPGvgeCQx7WIXaKs1cEXhw6aa9EVsAbeXhc TC5huBiNy5Y8oU9KtgY4aER+5m8SIVBEPoOH2OFV1Za/2WL2BxoC+5UTG6YyFaXi o= Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Original-Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mail-ot0-f171.google.com X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qVfGDukLyA49VRDc6rdpn42LqJCubAvMbNFDgS/Kvnk=; b=f0fK4h0uhfGf43ktRKLOzj5GiAnrnAmr0o+lhb5RvWlrIvgZqBkYp2Cs09LydawoX1 XSas7dRqQYeLJUMzY0gHk9iyQiPwA4vDz3cxIPDicZDNs2PqqClwUxEqErf+vo5iJMwN qoHpRgHnkilb33xBVmy3uIUQKhFb26AXMGokV1GFCX+I/PHKyTDWGxwV1lzeXv1oxw2Y AncPpCZY/xLME0iqJCjN+s8OET3YDHUjCleQfRcQcx6mEJKZ9sKoTT/LCTN3qdJc+opw kCyEoYGXVe1lyLpYRI4uMQ/BvSN9vgJf0q1kSwm4VLsM8tKnATfosbEvg/GcGA0zQx0P pyfg== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPAwgUfYvjxYG6ZlTS+6yTE0Ca4ONQ+5runhbXgcFLw3WDLeAJF/ 3nDlIJFCl90f4xCqi/CYRR4ZqK8b5SDuBzdCCts= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvKG9V//QJSeSetjNq1puO/6XacasAmeb41q5ykocFJLxM7FgYTTe8DppwmoTfvZ9DCHwqtGY8QicIUB7VobEg= X-Received: by 10.157.82.104 with SMTP id q40mr5573457otg.332.1519563192040; Sun, 25 Feb 2018 04:53:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87fu5pb7ql.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha:82891 Archived-At: Received: from server1.sourceware.org ([209.132.180.131] helo=sourceware.org) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1epvlp-00074T-2Q for glibc-alpha@blaine.gmane.org; Sun, 25 Feb 2018 13:51:13 +0100 Received: (qmail 118402 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2018 12:53:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 118391 invoked by uid 89); 25 Feb 2018 12:53:15 -0000 On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * H. J. Lu: > >> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 1:26 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> * H. J. Lu: >>> >>>> What have I done wrong? >>> >>> My understanding (shared by Carlos as far as I know) is that you do >>> not need to restore the shadow stack pointer when unwinding for >>> cancellation or thread exit. >> >> It may be true for thread exit. Are you saying that a function will never >> return after cancellation point? > > That's certainly the intent. Cancellation is supposed to be > unstoppable. The question is what happens after cancellation. Can a function return after cancellation? -- H.J.