From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31224 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2004 20:50:51 -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 31172 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2004 20:50:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2004 20:50:49 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i32Konjl007600 for ; Fri, 2 Apr 2004 15:50:49 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i32Kokj03885; Fri, 2 Apr 2004 15:50:46 -0500 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C349D2B92; Fri, 2 Apr 2004 15:50:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <406DD226.1080104@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 20:50:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ulrich Weigand , Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Use frame_type for sigtramp test in infrun.c References: <200403292338.BAA16799@faui1d.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> In-Reply-To: <200403292338.BAA16799@faui1d.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00071.txt.bz2 > I'm not sure what the correct way to fix this issue would be. > > However, simply removing the whole 'if' block makes signals.exp pass on s390. > This is because both the handler and the signal return trampoline are now > simply treated as calls into subroutines, and both are skipped with > step_over_function, so that everything works just as expected. > > Why is this if needed in the first place? Isn't this just to work around > frame problems that caused step_over_function to not handle signal handlers > correctly? I.e. if we have new-style frames that work properly, can't we > just skip that whole if? Joel, from memory you had a change to: if (((stop_pc == ecs->stop_func_start /* Quick test */ || in_prologue (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_start)) && !IN_SOLIB_RETURN_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name)) || IN_SOLIB_CALL_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name) || ecs->stop_func_name == 0) { /* It's a subroutine call. */ handle_step_into_function (ecs); return; } pending? If we do pull the sigtramp code I think it would be prudent to first have that committed - Joel's change greatly clarifies the logic. Andrew