Re: [PATCH] Hexagon: Swap SIGRGMAX-1 and SIGRTMIN+1

[Laurent Vivier]

Le 20/11/2019 à 11:45, Peter Maydell a écrit :
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2019 at 08:10, Laurent Vivier <address@hidden> wrote:
>> For the moment we don't have a better solution, Josh Kunz tried to
>> rework [1] patches from Miloš Stojanović [2] but it doesn't seem to be
>> an easy task.
>>
>> So I agree we need a generic solution to fix this problem, but in the
>> meantime I told to Taylor if he doesn't care about Go on hexagon he can
>> do this change specifically to his target (perhaps we can have cleaner
>> approach by containing this change into linux-user/hexagon). And what I
>> understand is hexagon libc (musl) doesn't work without this.
> 
> I really don't like target-specific ifdeffery that changes behaviour
> that shouldn't be target specific. They reduce the chances we ever
> try to go back and actually fix the underlying problem correctly,
> and they can be awkward to undo without breaking things.
> As far as I can tell there is nothing special about Hexagon here.

I understand your point, and I agree, but not allowing this will block
the merge of the hexagon target, and I don't see any fix for the
underlying problem coming soon.

Other targets work without this change, and adding this change breaks
some user space applications (like go), whereas adding this change for
hexagon target only will improve the situation for it (with no
regression, as it doesn't work at all for the moment)

But, yes, we must fix the underlying problem...

Thanks,
Laurent