From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14665 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2002 18:39:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14626 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2002 18:39:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2002 18:39:05 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16SjLI-0006gK-00; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 13:38:52 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Snyder Cc: Andrew Cagney , Per Bothner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: patch to ignore SIGPWR and SIGXCPU (used by pthreads) Message-ID: <20020121133852.A25664@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder , Andrew Cagney , Per Bothner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3C49D806.4050500@bothner.com> <3C4B6560.6010201@cygnus.com> <3C4BAC6B.1030908@bothner.com> <3C4BBF78.8050405@cygnus.com> <3C4C4F81.7269@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C4C4F81.7269@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00655.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 09:27:29AM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > > > Why not? What does it hurt to (by default) just pass them to the > > > inferior? Having gdb stop inconveniences (and confuses) everybody who > > > uses gcj. Having gdb silently pass the signals to the application > > > inconveniences/confuses - who? > > > > Consider SIGXCPU. > > > > With your proposed change, a program that exceeds its CPU usage will > > quietly terminate. The user will loose their entire debug session. > > This is very different to GDB's current behavour where the signal is > > intercepted, the program is stopped, and control is returned to the user. > > > Java's use of these signals is somewhat analogous to what > linux threads does. In that case, we also "silence" the > signals, but we do it only in the context where we know > they are used. Only for linux, and only when a multi-thread > program is detected. > > Could you do something like that? Could we make Boehm GC export two variables containing the values of the signals it intends to use, and recognise their presence? -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer