From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9975 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2011 13:13:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 9910 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jan 2011 13:13:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:13:26 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p05DCvHZ021636; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:12:57 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p05DCtEl011037; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:12:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 13:13:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201101051312.p05DCtEl011037@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: brobecker@adacore.com CC: gdb@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20110105072245.GA28888@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:22:45 +0400) Subject: Re: does it make sense to stop on SIGPRIO? References: <20110105072245.GA28888@adacore.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:22:45 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > > I've been looking at how we decide what to when we receive a signal. > We have some code that disables stop&printing for various signals > because these signals are used as part of normal thread operations. > > /* These signals are used internally by user-level thread > implementations. (See signal(5) on Solaris.) Like the above > signals, a healthy program receives and handles them as part of > its normal operation. */ > > We do the same for other signals, which are not error signals: > > /* Signals that are not errors should not normally enter the debugger. */ > > On LynxOS, changing the priority of a thread automatically causes > a SIGPRIO signal to be raised. I think that SIGPRIO falls more > into the second category (not a signal used to indicate an error). > > Are there any known situations where we would want a SIGPRIO would > be indicating something abnormal, or significant enough that we would > want to stop? Given that SIGPRIO seems to be something rather un-UNIXy (OpenBSD, Linux and Solaris don't seem to have it), I think you can do here whatever you like ;).