Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFC: fix problems with errors during quitting (killed.exp)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:01:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F58CF84.7040304@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030905155833.GA27258@nevyn.them.org>

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 11:53:55AM -0400, J. Johnston wrote:
> 
>>The following patch fixes the problem that occurs when an error happens 
>>while
>>quitting.  Often an error() call gets triggered and the poor user is thrown
>>back to the gdb command line where they try to quit again.  I made an 
>>attempt
>>to fix a similar problem by handling ptrace errors in quitting, however, 
>>thread-db.c gets
>>into multiple precarious situations because it has to rely on libthread_db
>>for information.  When the thread has been killed/maimed, it gets errors 
>>when
>>they are not expected and quitting becomes impossible.
>>
>>My new strategy is to intercept error() calls during quitting.  Basically,
>>a simple get/set function is set up to denote when we the user has confirmed
>>a quit.  If we get into top.c:throw_exception() and quit has been 
>>confirmed, it
>>exits the program.  This handles any number of messy kill scenarios and 
>>causes
>>no regressions in the current testsuite.  It fixes gdb.threads/killed.exp.  
>>I made the
>>functions external so other parts of gdb can register a confirmed quit if 
>>necessary.  I could
>>make these routines static if this feature is not needed.  I chose to exit 
>>with the
>>code being passed on the jump.  There may be a better constant choice.
>>
>>If anyone can think of scenario that this code is not going to handle 
>>correctly that might
>>not be exercised by the testsuite, please let me know.
>>
>>Tested on x86 and ia64.
>>
>>Comments?
> 
> 
> My immediate concern is, does killed.exp leave a stopped binary around?
> 

It doesn't, but the debugged process going away was the cause of the error in the
first place.  I don't know if there are can't-quit scenarios where a process
will be left around.  Some fork/exec nightmare perhaps??, but I'm not sure what
gdb could be expected to do in such a situation.

-- Jeff J.

> Other than that I like it.
> 
> 
>>2003-09-04  Jeff Johnston  <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
>>
>>	* top.h (get_quit_confirmed, set_quit_confirmed): New prototypes.
>>	* top.c (get_quit_confirmed, set_quit_confirmed): New functions.
>>	(throw_exception): If quit confirmed, exit instead of jumping.
> 
> 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2003-09-05 18:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-09-05 15:54 J. Johnston
2003-09-05 15:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-09-05 18:01   ` J. Johnston [this message]
2003-09-10 18:36   ` Andrew Cagney
2003-09-11 20:11     ` J. Johnston
2003-09-11 22:38       ` Andrew Cagney
2003-09-12 15:38         ` J. Johnston

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3F58CF84.7040304@redhat.com \
    --to=jjohnstn@redhat.com \
    --cc=drow@mvista.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox