From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-17945-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 21377 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2004 19:46:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 21366 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2004 19:46:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO avtrex.com) (216.102.217.178)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2004 19:46:09 -0000
Received: from avtrex.com ([192.168.0.111] RDNS failed) by avtrex.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713);
	 Mon, 26 Apr 2004 12:46:08 -0700
Message-ID: <408D66FF.1060004@avtrex.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 20:48:00 -0000
From: David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031030
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
CC:  gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: #1 0x1234456765432189 in <signal handler>
References: <40892F73.30209@gnu.org> <20040426111234.3eb8f0a5@saguaro>
In-Reply-To: <20040426111234.3eb8f0a5@saguaro>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Apr 2004 19:46:08.0282 (UTC) FILETIME=[1E7707A0:01C42BC7]
X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00163.txt.bz2

Kevin Buettner wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:00:03 -0400
>Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>At present a signal handler, in a backtrace is displayed as:
>>
>>#0  catcher (signal=26) at 
>>/home/cygnus/cagney/GDB/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/sigaltstack.c:71
>>#1  <signal handler called>
>>#2  0x0000000000400751 in thrower (next_level=INNER, sig=26, itimer=1, 
>>on_stack=134217728) at /home/cygnus/cagney/GD
>>
>>It isn't exactly informative.  Since we're now expecting GDB to do 
>>something sane with a signal handlers, I think how it is displayed 
>>should be changed.  In particular the output should be changed to:
>>
>>#1  0xffff01111111 in <signal handler>
>>
>>thoughts?
>>    
>>
>
>I have no objection to printing an address, but I don't think
>that referring to the thing in frame #1 as "<signal handler>"
>is correct.  The signal handler in this case is actually catcher().
>Frame #1 is created by the OS to hold the process's state prior to
>receiving the signal in question.  That being the case, I'd like to
>see either:
>
>#1  0xffff01111111 in <signal handler caller>
>
>or:
>
>#1  0xffff01111111 in <signal context frame>
>  
>
There are typically several other things that are known about the signal 
at this point.  How about adding signal number (or name), cause, 
faulting address, etc.

David Daney