From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-10679-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 32170 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2001 22:27:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 32025 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2001 22:26:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5)
  by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 21 Nov 2001 22:26:52 -0000
Received: from cse.cygnus.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA03600;
	Wed, 21 Nov 2001 14:26:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from kev@localhost)
	by cse.cygnus.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA21971;
	Wed, 21 Nov 2001 15:26:41 -0700
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2001 19:19:00 -0000
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com>
Message-Id: <1011121222640.ZM21970@ocotillo.lan>
In-Reply-To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@science.uva.nl>
        "Re: [PATCH RFA] lin-lwp.c: Block SIGCHLD events when attaching" (Nov 21, 12:52pm)
References: <1011119193045.ZM16376@ocotillo.lan> 
	<s3ipu6cfii0.fsf@soliton.wins.uva.nl>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0.1 13Jan97 Caldera)
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@science.uva.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFA] lin-lwp.c: Block SIGCHLD events when attaching
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00175.txt.bz2

On Nov 21, 12:52pm, Mark Kettenis wrote:

> Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com> writes:
> 
> > When doing a lin_lwp_attach_lwp(), it is sometimes possible to receive
> > a SIGCHLD signal thus causing the waitpid() call to fail with EINTR. 
> > This in turn causes the second assert() in lin_lwp_attach_lwp() to
> > fail.
> 
> Thanks for tracking this down.  Note that getting this EINTR is a
> side-effect of the tricks we play with sigsuspend in lin_lwp_wait.
> 
> > The fix is below.  Okay to commit?
> 
> Looks fine to me.  lin_lwp_attach_lwp() should not be called unless
> the inferior is already running so blocking SIGCHLD here is OK.

Committed.