From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20286 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2018 16:03:59 -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 20277 invoked by uid 89); 23 Sep 2018 16:03:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: simark.ca Received: from simark.ca (HELO simark.ca) (158.69.221.121) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:03:57 +0000 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [192.222.164.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 796BA1E519; Sun, 23 Sep 2018 12:03:55 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1537718635; bh=dsSFHhJo0w8/Bn0AIR6MlKgiX2t/OhCcdCAsyRZ92tY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=O9TsPLbjERnC+S+Q0BSQCBT3W0F2psJ8t3p27H5rjldLptYWpPxP2DNG42Cs5Qr0O tykoUTUEMLQLOOdjo7H+KmyCHs7v6C5j/O5F6ScUbv+SkwhIA4qhhVM3rjc90ZCdQg zbtH8lHHv94B4epMuQnl6YiZ5oQ6D0YlkHDm4Pyg= Subject: Re: [PATCH] Also recognize __sighndlr on Solaris/x86 To: Rainer Orth , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 16:03:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-09/txt/msg00778.txt.bz2 On 2018-09-19 8:56 a.m., Rainer Orth wrote: > Unlike Solaris/SPARC, the __sighndlr function isn't recognized as part > of a signal handler, causing a couple of testcases to fail. > > The following patch fixes that. A followup patch will move this to > common code to avoid such unnecessary discrepancies between > Solaris/SPARC and x86 in the future. > > While this fixes a couple of backtraces to now correctly print > > #1 > > they often fail later with > > #2 0x0ff3ffffff00857f in ?? () > Backtrace stopped: Cannot access memory at address 0xff3000002e0886f > > which needs further investigation. > > Tested on amd64-pc-solaris2.11 (running the tests with both -m64 and > -m32). Ok for master? > > Rainer > I noticed this had not been replied to, this LGTM. I don't know much about Solaris, but I trust that you know what you are talking about :) and this looks pretty straightforward. Simon