From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4661 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2009 18:56:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 4653 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2009 18:56:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:56:30 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 272CE10D9A; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:56:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07EA410B26; Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:56:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LgkeI-0001CB-75; Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:56:26 -0400 Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio_Durigan_J=FAnior?= , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] catch syscall -- try 4 -- Architecture-independent part Message-ID: <20090309185626.GA4579@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio_Durigan_J=FAnior?= , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1232929831.26873.22.camel@miki> <20090309131856.GA16796@caradoc.them.org> <1236611364.12452.7.camel@miki> <200903091839.50051.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200903091839.50051.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00121.txt.bz2 On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 06:39:49PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 09 March 2009 15:09:24, Sérgio Durigan Júnior wrote: > > if (catch_syscall_enabled () > 0) ... > > > > What happens is that the code does not freeze. GDB still works with > > this, and as far as I could investigate it shows everything fine. > > Therefore, I think this function is not needed at all. > > Oh, was that because you're only enabling PTRACE_O_TRACESYSGOOD > after startup_inferior is finished, in linux_child_post_startup_inferior, > and, PT_SYSCALL just behaves as PT_CONTINUE in that case? That > would make sense to me. No - without PTRACE_O_TRACESYSGOOD, PT_SYSCALL reports a SIGTRAP on each syscall entry or exit. With it, it reports 0x80 | SIGTRAP. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery