From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15105 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2013 19:08:28 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 15089 invoked by uid 89); 17 Sep 2013 19:08:27 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:08:27 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HJ8KxI005561 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:08:20 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HJ8It0020907; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:08:19 -0400 Message-ID: <5238A8A2.4030107@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:08:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Philippe Waroquiers CC: Tom Tromey , Sergio Durigan Junior , Pierre Muller , "'GDB Patches'" Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] New convenience variable $_exitsignal References: <00db01ce6b24$0b716aa0$22543fe0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <52374823.4010203@redhat.com> <87bo3rxpko.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <1379444008.2222.35.camel@soleil> In-Reply-To: <1379444008.2222.35.camel@soleil> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00544.txt.bz2 On 09/17/2013 07:53 PM, Philippe Waroquiers wrote: > On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 12:36 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > >> Another consideration along these lines is that I have a branch in >> progress for "catch exit" -- it's been waiting for Sergio's work on >> these convenience variables. I think here as well $_exitsignal seems >> like a natural fit, even though the process has not technically exited >> at the catchpoint. > Will there be (significant) functional differences between > "catch exit" > and > "catch syscall exit exit_group" ? "catch exit" implemented with PTRACE_O_TRACEEXIT allows catching SIGKILLs. "catch syscall" doesn't. See: [PR 15812 - catch death by SIGKILL] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15812 -- Pedro Alves