Re: fix interrupt.exp for hpux11

Elena Zannoni
2002-09-10T00:50:59Z

Jeff Law writes:
>
> This is a repost of a patch I submitted last year, but which was
> never approved. It's incorrect to use TT_PROC_CONTINUE in this
> context due to its inability to pass along (or clear pending) signals.
>
> This fixes interrupt.exp for hpux11.
>
>
> * infttrace.c (child_resume): Simplify and rework to avoid
> TT_PROC_CONTINUE.

I don't see any harm in this. The file is only used for hpux11. There
are no current maintainers, and you were the previous maintainer, so,
sure, go ahead.

Elena

>
> Index: infttrace.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/infttrace.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.19
> diff -c -3 -p -r1.19 infttrace.c
> *** infttrace.c 21 Jan 2002 01:27:01 -0000 1.19
> --- infttrace.c 6 Sep 2002 20:51:47 -0000
> *************** child_resume (ptid_t ptid, int step, enu
> *** 4539,4636 ****
>
> else
> {
> ! /* TT_LWP_CONTINUE can pass signals to threads,
> ! * TT_PROC_CONTINUE can't. So if there are any
> ! * signals to pass, we have to use the (slower)
> ! * loop over the stopped threads.
> ! *
> ! * Equally, if we have to not continue some threads,
> ! * due to saved events, we have to use the loop.
> ! */
> ! if ((signal != 0) || saved_signals_exist ())
> ! {
> ! if (resume_all_threads)
> ! {
> !
> ! #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> ! if (debug_on)
> ! printf ("Doing a continue by loop of all threads\n");
> ! #endif
>
> ! threads_continue_all_with_signals (tid, signal);
> !
> ! clear_all_handled ();
> ! clear_all_stepping_mode ();
> ! }
> !
> ! else
> ! {
> #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> ! printf ("Doing a continue w/signal of just thread %d\n", tid);
> #endif
>
> ! threads_continue_one_with_signal (tid, signal);
>
> ! /* Clear the "handled" state of this thread, because
> ! * we'll soon get a new event for it. Other events
> ! * can stay as they were.
> ! */
> ! clear_handled (tid);
> ! clear_stepping_mode (tid);
> ! }
> }
> -
> else
> {
> - /* No signals to send.
> - */
> - if (resume_all_threads)
> - {
> - #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> - if (debug_on)
> - printf ("Doing a continue by process of process %d\n", tid);
> - #endif
> -
> - if (more_events_left > 0)
> - {
> - warning ("Losing buffered events on continue.");
> - more_events_left = 0;
> - }
> -
> - call_ttrace (TT_PROC_CONTINUE,
> - tid,
> - TT_NIL,
> - TT_NIL,
> - TT_NIL);
> -
> - clear_all_handled ();
> - clear_all_stepping_mode ();
> - }
> -
> - else
> - {
> #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> ! if (debug_on)
> ! {
> ! printf ("Doing a continue of just thread %d\n", tid);
> ! if (is_terminated (tid))
> ! printf ("Why are we continuing a dead thread? (5)\n");
> ! }
> #endif
>
> ! call_ttrace (TT_LWP_CONTINUE,
> ! tid,
> ! TT_NIL,
> ! TT_NIL,
> ! TT_NIL);
>
> ! /* Clear the "handled" state of this thread, because
> ! * we'll soon get a new event for it. Other events
> ! * can stay as they were.
> ! */
> ! clear_handled (tid);
> ! clear_stepping_mode (tid);
> ! }
> }
> }
>
> --- 4539,4579 ----
>
> else
> {
> ! /* TT_LWP_CONTINUE can pass signals to threads, TT_PROC_CONTINUE can't.
> ! Therefore, we really can't use TT_PROC_CONTINUE here.
>
> ! Consider a process which stopped due to signal which gdb decides
> ! to handle and not pass on to the inferior. In that case we must
> ! clear the pending signal by restarting the inferior using
> ! TT_LWP_CONTINUE and pass zero as the signal number. Else the
> ! pending signal will be passed to the inferior. interrupt.exp
> ! in the testsuite does this precise thing and fails due to the
> ! unwanted signal delivery to the inferior. */
> ! if (resume_all_threads)
> ! {
> #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> ! if (debug_on)
> ! printf ("Doing a continue by loop of all threads\n");
> #endif
>
> ! threads_continue_all_with_signals (tid, signal);
>
> ! clear_all_handled ();
> ! clear_all_stepping_mode ();
> }
> else
> {
> #ifdef THREAD_DEBUG
> ! printf ("Doing a continue w/signal of just thread %d\n", tid);
> #endif
>
> ! threads_continue_one_with_signal (tid, signal);
>
> ! /* Clear the "handled" state of this thread, because we
> ! will soon get a new event for it. Other events can
> ! stay as they were. */
> ! clear_handled (tid);
> ! clear_stepping_mode (tid);
> }
> }
>
>
>