From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 758 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2014 07:58:07 -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 747 invoked by uid 89); 6 Feb 2014 07:58:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 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-pb0-f48.google.com Received: from mail-pb0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-pb0-f48.google.com) (209.85.160.48) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 06 Feb 2014 07:58:05 +0000 Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id rr13so1439556pbb.35 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 23:58:03 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.68.87.98 with SMTP id w2mr10412263pbz.2.1391673483284; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 23:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from seba.sebabeach.org.gmail.com (173-13-178-53-sfba.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.13.178.53]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n6sm486080pbj.22.2014.02.05.23.58.01 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Feb 2014 23:58:02 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Evans To: Pedro Alves Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , "gdb-patches\@sourceware.org" , saugustine@google.com Subject: Re: Fun with LD_PRELOAD References: <8761ovp1hw.fsf@gnu.org> <52F28CF7.8040206@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 07:58:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <52F28CF7.8040206@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 05 Feb 2014 19:11:51 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves writes: > (removed guile) > > As we're talking about it, > > On 02/05/2014 06:21 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > >> For example, a colleague at Google tripped over a bug that requires a >> specific timing to replicate. I don't have all the details at hand, >> but I think I'm hitting the same assert. >> >> infrun.c:1948: internal-error: resume: Assertion >> `pc_in_thread_step_range (pc, tp)' failed. >> >> AIUI, It happens, for example, when the user does a "next", and a >> signal arrives on another thread while the thread being next'd has >> stepped into a subroutine (thus requiring gdb to step out to implement >> the semantics of "next"). I now have a simple repro (at least for the >> assert I'm seeing), and it was very straightforward to write. It >> involves tracking the PTRACE_SINGLESTEP being issued to one thread >> (that implement "next") and at the right time send a signal to another >> thread. > > perhaps you could check whether the patch at > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-01/msg00910.html > > also fixes your reproducer? Yes it does, thanks.