From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-113099-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11041 invoked by alias); 4 Jun 2014 15:24:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 11025 invoked by uid 89); 4 Jun 2014 15:24:46 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-yh0-f49.google.com
Received: from mail-yh0-f49.google.com (HELO mail-yh0-f49.google.com) (209.85.213.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 15:24:45 +0000
Received: by mail-yh0-f49.google.com with SMTP id c41so6530310yho.36        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.113.69 with SMTP id z45mr75253211yhg.0.1401895483636; Wed, 04 Jun 2014 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.150.70 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 08:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140604142844.GB11730@blade.nx>
References: <20140604100755.GA7570@blade.nx>	<20140604100957.GC7570@blade.nx>	<834n017z8w.fsf@gnu.org>	<20140604133603.GC10121@blade.nx>	<83sink7pww.fsf@gnu.org>	<20140604142844.GB11730@blade.nx>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 15:24:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAP9bCMQpqUR=PYJgPyZ-rdhdykJhU31mLgH8raR5dPQnMC9yEw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v3] Demangler crash handler
From: Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com>
To: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, 	Andrew Burgess <aburgess@broadcom.com>, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>, 	Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>, 	Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg00171.txt.bz2

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> > Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 14:36:03 +0100
>> > From: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
>> > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, aburgess@broadcom.com, xdje42@gmail.com,
>> >         fw@deneb.enyo.de, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, palves@redhat.com,
>> >         tromey@redhat.com
>> >
>> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> > > > From: Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > Eli pointed out that SIGSEGV is an ANSI-standard signal but I
>> > > > found various other SIGSEGV checks in GDB
>> > >
>> > > They should all be removed.
>> >
>> > Ok, I'll do this.  Should I commit the change as obvious?
>>
>> I think so, yes.
>
> Ok, I'll do that.

Are we talking about #ifdef SIGSEGV in, e.g., common/signals.c?

[assuming that's correct ...]
If one goes down this path, I think the patch while perhaps "obvious"
would become a bit involved (why just SEGV?) and thus the obviousness
diminishes.
I think it diminishes to a point where the obviousness is gone.
Please submit any such patch for review.
Thanks!