From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 120269 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2015 13:43:19 -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 120258 invoked by uid 89); 22 Oct 2015 13:43:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:43:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D781B8C1B2; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 13:43:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t9MDhFTn032622; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 09:43:16 -0400 Message-ID: <5628E7F3.40708@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:00:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not pass NULL for the string in catch_errors References: <1441809933-9612-1-git-send-email-lgustavo@codesourcery.com> <55F182B1.4020404@redhat.com> <5627739A.2090401@codesourcery.com> <5628C37E.2030208@redhat.com> <5628C715.5010701@codesourcery.com> <5628CD72.1080001@redhat.com> <5628D847.4050109@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <5628D847.4050109@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-10/txt/msg00463.txt.bz2 On 10/22/2015 01:36 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > On 10/22/2015 09:50 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 10/22/2015 12:23 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > That would be fine by me. I was just experimenting with > TRY/CATCH/END_CATCH after my unsuccessful replacement of catch_errors > with catch_exceptions. See below. >>> >>> With catch_exceptions, instead of catching the error and letting the >>> inferior continue, it will just cause the inferior to terminate. >> >> I don't understand. Why do you say this will happen? >> > > I replaced catch_errors with catch_exceptions in record-full.c. I saw a > bunch of failures in gdb.reverse/sigall-reverse.exp, starting at this point: > > Breakpoint 142, handle_TERM (sig=15) at > ../../../gdb-head-ro/gdb/testsuite/gdb.reverse/sigall-reverse.c:378^M > 378 }^M > (gdb) PASS: gdb.reverse/sigall-reverse.exp: send signal TERM > continue^M > Continuing.^M > The next instruction is syscall exit_group. It will make the program > exit. Do you want to stop the program?([y] or n) yes^M > Process record: inferior program stopped.^M > ^M > [process 21188] #1 stopped.^M > > The above is a normal run. If i replace catch_errors with > catch_exceptions, instead of stopping the inferior, it will terminate. > Maybe there is a bug somewhere, or something is being mishandled. It just sounds to me that you didn't take into account that the return values of catch_errors and catch_exceptions differ. while one does: if (exception.reason < 0) { ... return exception.reason; } the other does: if (exception.reason != 0) return 0; This matters because the result is returned by record_full_message_wrapper_safe, and checked here: if (!record_full_message_wrapper_safe (regcache, GDB_SIGNAL_0)) { status->kind = TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED; status->value.sig = GDB_SIGNAL_0; break; } Thanks, Pedro Alves