From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5123 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2013 18:59:03 -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 5114 invoked by uid 89); 17 Sep 2013 18:59:03 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:59:03 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HIwuKW007780 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:58:56 -0400 Received: from psique (ovpn-113-38.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.38]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r8HIwrYV000802 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:58:54 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Philippe Waroquiers Cc: Tom Tromey , Pedro Alves , Pierre Muller , "'GDB Patches'" Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] New convenience variable $_exitsignal References: <00db01ce6b24$0b716aa0$22543fe0$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <52374823.4010203@redhat.com> <87bo3rxpko.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <1379444008.2222.35.camel@soleil> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:59:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1379444008.2222.35.camel@soleil> (Philippe Waroquiers's message of "Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:53:28 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00541.txt.bz2 On Tuesday, September 17 2013, Philippe Waroquiers wrote: > On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 12:36 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > >> Another consideration along these lines is that I have a branch in >> progress for "catch exit" -- it's been waiting for Sergio's work on >> these convenience variables. I think here as well $_exitsignal seems >> like a natural fit, even though the process has not technically exited >> at the catchpoint. > Will there be (significant) functional differences between > "catch exit" > and > "catch syscall exit exit_group" ? I think this is more like "catch fork" and "catch syscall fork clone". ptrace already offers PTRACE_O_TRACEEXIT so we could be using that even when "catch syscall" is not fully functional on the target (i.e., there's no XML file to translate syscalls names to numbers). But Tom may correct me here. -- Sergio