From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30514 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2010 19:50:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 30505 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Aug 2010 19:50:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:50:07 +0000 Received: (qmail 6497 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2010 19:50:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 30 Aug 2010 19:50:05 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [0/9]#2 Fix lost siginfo_t Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 19:50:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.33-29-realtime; KDE/4.4.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Jan Kratochvil References: <20100830070955.GA6831@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20100830070955.GA6831@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201008302050.02945.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2010-08/txt/msg00532.txt.bz2 I must confess that my knee-jerk reaction to the main idea of the patchset is "I'm not convinced this is a good idea". A thread can't be stopped for more than one reason at the same time, so why isn't target_wait plus an on-the-side interface to get at the expensive-to-get siginfo enough? I've just extracted the testsuite hunks from patches 7 and 8, so that I've got the new gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp test on my pristine mainline checkout, with no other changes from the series, and ran the test against amd64-linux gdbserver: >make check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=native-gdbserver siginfo-threads.exp" (..) === gdb Summary === # of expected passes 22 compared to native amd64-linux gdb, which indeed has these failures: Running ../../../src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp ... FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 1 si_signo FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 1 si_pid FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 2 si_signo FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 2 si_pid FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 3 si_signo FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: signal 3 si_pid FAIL: gdb.threads/siginfo-threads.exp: continue to break-at-exit === gdb Summary === # of expected passes 15 # of unexpected failures 7 I'm guessing that this is because of gdbserver/linux-low.c's much better handling of pending signals than linux-nat.c's. (see linux-low.c's lwp->pending_signals, and linux_resume_one_lwp, for example). -- Pedro Alves