From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BbjoN-0006wu-TV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:39:28 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1BbjoM-0006wi-FB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:39:27 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BbjoM-0006wf-Be
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:39:26 -0400
Received: from [193.252.22.25] (helo=mwinf0601.wanadoo.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bbjmx-0002lk-0L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:37:59 -0400
Received: from bellard.org (ATuileries-112-1-3-108.w81-48.abo.wanadoo.fr
	[81.48.134.108])
	by mwinf0601.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 2673E340019F
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:37:58 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <40D47A90.2020100@bellard.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:40:32 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] linux-user sysinfo support & do_sigreturn
	fix for i386-user
References: <BAY12-F92z7EjQxzmWe0006e81c@hotmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAY12-F92z7EjQxzmWe0006e81c@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

François Guimond wrote:
> 
> Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> 
>> The code was buggy, but your patch is still not correct. I tried to 
>> make a correction. Try it !
> 
> 
> Just tried it with strace and it looks good, no sigprocmask incoherence 
> present.

Good.

>[...]

> Minor, is there any work being done or planned to support the i386 
> syscalls 149 and 252?  (I think it corresponds to sysctl and 
> exit_group)  My application still complains about those, although they 
> don't seem to affect operation of the program (well, the lack of 
> exit_group does cause problems quitting it, but nothing a kill can't 
> fix..).

exit_group() may not be implemented on < 2.6 kernels. A patch was 
submitted some time ago for some functions of sysctl, but I never took 
the time to merge it.

Fabrice.