Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>,  gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] Check LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED for enqueue/dequeue pending signals
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:40:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <86a8lxxzsu.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E2A42E.4080308@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Fri, 11	Mar 2016 10:55:42 +0000")

Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

> I like the idea, but why a macro instead of a function?

I thought the condition is simple enough to be a macro.

Here is the version to change it to function and also update comments as
Luis suggested.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

From 6c086204b3259e576ad9d4abe687ac6f697432fa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yao Qi <yao.qi@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:44:01 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Check lwp_signal_can_be_delivered for enqueue/dequeue pending signals

The enqueue and dequeue signals in linux_resume_one_lwp_throw use one
condition and its inverted one.  This patch is to move the condition
into a function lwp_signal_can_be_delivered, so that the next patch can
change the condition in one place.

gdb/gdbserver:

2016-03-17  Yao Qi  <yao.qi@linaro.org>

	* linux-low.c (lwp_signal_can_be_delivered): New function.
	(linux_resume_one_lwp_throw): Use lwp_signal_can_be_delivered.

diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
index 4520a4a..ee8e42a 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
+++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
@@ -4118,6 +4118,16 @@ single_step (struct lwp_info* lwp)
   return step;
 }
 
+/* The signal can be delivered to the inferior if we are not trying to
+   reinsert a breakpoint and not trying to finish a fast tracepoint
+   collect.  */
+
+static int
+lwp_signal_can_be_delivered (struct lwp_info *lwp)
+{
+  return !(lwp->bp_reinsert != 0 || lwp->collecting_fast_tracepoint);
+}
+
 /* Resume execution of LWP.  If STEP is nonzero, single-step it.  If
    SIGNAL is nonzero, give it that signal.  */
 
@@ -4157,13 +4167,12 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
     }
 
   /* If we have pending signals or status, and a new signal, enqueue the
-     signal.  Also enqueue the signal if we are waiting to reinsert a
-     breakpoint; it will be picked up again below.  */
+     signal.  Also enqueue the signal if it can't be delivered to the
+     inferior right now.  */
   if (signal != 0
       && (lwp->status_pending_p
 	  || lwp->pending_signals != NULL
-	  || lwp->bp_reinsert != 0
-	  || fast_tp_collecting))
+	  || !lwp_signal_can_be_delivered (lwp)))
     {
       enqueue_pending_signal (lwp, signal, info);
 
@@ -4269,12 +4278,9 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
 	}
     }
 
-  /* If we have pending signals, consume one unless we are trying to
-     reinsert a breakpoint or we're trying to finish a fast tracepoint
-     collect.  */
-  if (lwp->pending_signals != NULL
-      && lwp->bp_reinsert == 0
-      && fast_tp_collecting == 0)
+  /* If we have pending signals, consume one if it can be delivered to
+     the inferior.  */
+  if (lwp->pending_signals != NULL && lwp_signal_can_be_delivered (lwp))
     {
       struct pending_signals **p_sig;
 


  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-17  8:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-04 10:44 [PATCH 0/8] Step over instruction branches to itself Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 2/8] Check LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED for enqueue/dequeue pending signals Yao Qi
2016-03-11 10:55   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-17  8:40     ` Yao Qi [this message]
2016-03-17 11:07       ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:36         ` Yao Qi
2016-03-16 17:02   ` Luis Machado
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 4/8] Force to insert software single step breakpoint Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:49   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-16 11:47     ` Yao Qi
2016-03-17 12:40       ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:25         ` Yao Qi
2016-03-18 15:03           ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 7/8] Resume the inferior with signal rather than stepping over Yao Qi
2016-03-11 12:04   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-21  9:40     ` Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 1/8] Set signal to 0 after enqueue_pending_signal Yao Qi
2016-03-11 10:53   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:36     ` Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 3/8] Deliver signal in hardware single step Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:05   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-11 11:09     ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-11 11:37       ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-16 10:47         ` Yao Qi
2016-03-17 12:12           ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 6/8] [GDBserver] Don't error in reinsert_raw_breakpoint if bp->inserted Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:45 ` [PATCH 5/8] Insert breakpoint even when the raw breakpoint is found Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:54   ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-04 10:45 ` [PATCH 8/8] New test case gdb.base/branch-to-self.exp Yao Qi

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=86a8lxxzsu.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=palves@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