add user_regs for linux on arm
#3072
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @JohnTitor (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
|
If there's not, you can just ignore it :) Since we have a lot of supported env, covering everything is hard and ongoing. |
add `user_regs` for linux on arm This struct is used for `PTRACE_GETREGS` & `PTRACE_SETREGS`. We mirror the name used in `glibc`. This struct is called `pt_regs` in the kernel. Instead of a `uregs` array, we use separate named fields. > - \[ ] Edit corresponding file(s) under `libc-test/semver` when you add/remove item(s) AFAICT there's no file for linux on arm (not aarch64). Am I missing something here?
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
This struct is used for `PTRACE_GETREGS` & `PTRACE_SETREGS`. We mirror the name used in `glibc`. This struct is called `pt_regs` in the kernel. glibc uses a single array `uregs` instead of individual fields. The `asm/ptrace.h` header defined by the linux kernel defines macros to access the individual registers. Instead of `uregs` we just define the registers as individual fields.
Freax13
force-pushed
the
arm/user_regs
branch
from
2a24356 to
d36bf06
Compare
|
@bors r+ |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-cirrus-freebsd-12, checks-cirrus-freebsd-13, checks-cirrus-freebsd-14 |
1 similar comment
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-cirrus-freebsd-12, checks-cirrus-freebsd-13, checks-cirrus-freebsd-14 |
|
👀 Test was successful, but fast-forwarding failed: 422 Changes must be made through a pull request. |
This struct is used for
PTRACE_GETREGS&PTRACE_SETREGS. We mirror the name used inglibc. This struct is calledpt_regsin the kernel. Instead of auregsarray, we use separate named fields.AFAICT there's no file for linux on arm (not aarch64). Am I missing something here?