From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3429 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2012 12:59:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 3410 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Apr 2012 12:59:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:59:39 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1SOTj0-0000i4-I7 from Yao_Qi@mentor.com for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 05:59:38 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-03.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.39]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 29 Apr 2012 05:59:34 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 05:59:37 -0700 Message-ID: <4F9D3BA4.5090307@codesourcery.com> Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 15:16:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120412 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chung-Lin Tang CC: , Thomas Schwinge Subject: Re: [PATCH][SH] Signal handler unwinding for SH-Linux References: <4F9CF631.9080807@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <4F9CF631.9080807@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: 2012-04/txt/msg01065.txt.bz2 On 04/29/2012 04:05 PM, Chung-Lin Tang wrote: > The test results show improvement on many sighandler related tests, with > no regressions. Some gdb.base/sigbpt.exp tests change from FAIL->KFAIL, > though I'm not completely sure what that indicates. Chung-Lin, Not sure the comment at the beginning of gdb.base/sigbpt.exp is relevant to your KFAILs. # This test is known to tickle the following problems: kernel letting # the inferior execute both the system call, and the instruction # following, when single-stepping a system call; kernel failing to # propogate the single-step state when single-stepping the sigreturn # system call, instead resuming the inferior at full speed; GDB # doesn't know how to software single-step across a sigreturn # instruction. Since the kernel problems can be "fixed" using # software single-step this is KFAILed rather than XFAILed. If this comment is related to your KFAILs, this can be handled by computing the "next pc" of sigreturn or rt_sigreturn. Please have a look at functions {arm,mips,tic6x}_linux_syscall_next_pc. You can do something similar in SH backend. Hope it helps. -- Yao (齐尧)