From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24938 invoked by alias); 2 Feb 2006 17:06:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 24866 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Feb 2006 17:06:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cgf.cx (HELO cgf.cx) (24.61.23.223) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:06:00 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id BE1A313C0F8; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:05:58 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 17:06:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] fix spurious SIGSEGV faults under Cygwin Message-ID: <20060202170558.GD22365@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-patches@cygwin.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <43E1FA66.216E236C@dessent.net> <43E22C81.1C4600BA@dessent.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43E22C81.1C4600BA@dessent.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 08:00:01AM -0800, Brian Dessent wrote: >Brian Dessent wrote: > >> #define _CYGWIN_SIGNAL_STRING "cYgSiGw00f" >> +#define _CYGWIN_FAULT_IGNORE_STRING "cYgfAuLtIg" >> +#define _CYGWIN_FAULT_NOIGNORE_STRING "cYgNofAuLtIg" > >Sigh, this breaks strace under Cygwin, I should have tested more. Sorry >about that. Apparently strace expects anything starting with the 'cYg' >prefix to be followed by a hex number. I thought that since >_CYGWIN_SIGNAL_STRING already existed and didn't follow that format it >was safe to add more, but that's not the case. > >So, should I pick another prefix that's not 'cYg'? Or instead use >something like "cYg0 ..." since strace seems to just ignore the string >if its value is 0? Or something else? Brian, Thanks for the patch but I've been working on this too and, so far, I think it is possible to have a very minimal way of dealing with this problem. I haven't had time to delve into it too deeply but I have been exploring this problem on and off for a couple of weeks. If the situation at work calms down a little I may be able to finish up what I've been working on. OTOH, if what I have is really not working then I'll take a look at what you've done. Again, thanks for the patch. I probably should have sent a heads up that I was working on this. cgf