From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5551C433F5 for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:10:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:51392 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8gwm-0003Rk-D8 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 06:10:12 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33772) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8gvN-0002Jw-OP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 06:08:45 -0500 Received: from [2a00:1450:4864:20::334] (port=54810 helo=mail-wm1-x334.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8gvM-0002lS-Aq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 06:08:45 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x334.google.com with SMTP id p18so10784878wmg.4 for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 03:08:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FMA6ooDKJVyAtxR7p2leDvZKznMCxarXJ3rs4D6zjE0=; b=CKJZiSWKR9NdoNJ2ayioHmYGsjEEe/v4B9IQu+IUfEe9QS7gVEpj2GKU3conSjisRn Yw+lOfr9MkfFcSMT95u6SIU1xBZzL+PMdAf8+mLen+zPMXx922nvIX7sfCdfic12m7VX KT4cWvxEfsCllHokOR07G99bNhgHr4LmHhH4OKpHRN8EF2jtEV8eampDvRf/g8alUceD IcP3xTzm5kk6qUS2vHB4z9E8Wwx33EahD/fg69irjv7Z1Ep3mIGRK4HEjixLJzZKRlDf +KffGf2UxybHbtSzQgx903WzkZ0cQoS8oNJwkLY937Mmi6xkgejdmbH8g/HcDKt9m9gq 8hPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FMA6ooDKJVyAtxR7p2leDvZKznMCxarXJ3rs4D6zjE0=; b=r7JU3odg8FptMKWUdCv9lpBQIRjOgCXpialkd6AZPLO8TTWzNgiWjSn7LP5bf/tiRs jYW5QUrD5MryZ7ImsvRFDy/4Q/tArAUts1YThXBVmOTcbXrun6CeXU9gMnHZ83yYWkf9 EbzTt7IrPxtSrH8CK+sR2z3BMv/7crJ4twydRAHOOa2Ezs3TY0SOF8RX20FgMrnDpIhY +q2Gmd/nEkrZDvglOUW9RYk6EN6yGed95u6lTDzfdV6eKQGYQnbv06mV7PPZwNfxqwuO EMHCDG1LIxUkn4vn42NrwmnMNNkDd/YwuaKUh80jF9rsksryNkjua7WMo9rqp5Aw77fd 5eMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530v65HnCq13btPl4XnJEJDbo9XXBxnK/0zJNXV913PlujIrmFwu BkWGHY/kHsboVTRgDAB5ee8PWDb4y846bkw+qbOlrg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbG7efGGw3gKJNtSRl0YrWegC9wKZXHmRa/C3CLa95Nu6xap5iwHrZK/uKaEVkcIpKfoAzC6Dt40jBQmDHSXY= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:64aa:: with SMTP id m10mr940552wrp.295.1642244922751; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 03:08:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220109161923.85683-1-imp@bsdimp.com> <20220109161923.85683-17-imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: From: Peter Maydell Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:08:31 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/30] bsd-user/signal.c: host_to_target_siginfo_noswap To: Warner Losh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2a00:1450:4864:20::334 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::334; envelope-from=peter.maydell@linaro.org; helo=mail-wm1-x334.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, PDS_HP_HELO_NORDNS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kyle Evans , Stacey Son , QEMU Developers Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 06:19, Warner Losh wrote: > I need to work through those things in our development branch before trying > to fold them into this series. And I'm not yet sure the right way to do that because > many of the things are likely to be largish changes that may be tough to manage > keeping this patch series in sync. So I'm going to do all the trivial style and > tiny bug things first, then tackle this more fundamental issue. I've thought > about it enough to understand that the code in this patch series has some > conceptual mistakes that must be addressed. Having this very detailed feedback > is quite helpful in laying out the path for me to fix these issues (even if I don't > ultimately do everything like linux-user, I'll know why it's different rather than > the current situation where there's much inherited code and the best answer > I could give is 'well linux-user was like that 5 years ago and we needed to make > these hacks to make things work' which is completely unsatisfying to give and > to hear. Mmm. To the extent that the signal handling code you have in your out-of-tree branch is "this is what FreeBSD is shipping to users and it works more-or-less", maybe we should just accept that upstream with (with comments noting that it's got issues/is based on an older linux-user) and then update it to match today's linux-user as a second round of patching? If we have a definite path to eventually getting to the right place, I don't want to insist that you update all this stuff in your branch first before we let it land upstream if that's going to burden you with massively more work. -- PMM