From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: #1 0x1234456765432189 in <signal handler>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <408FB538.5060900@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <408D66FF.1060004@avtrex.com>
> 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.
Right, however
>> That being the case, I'd like to
>> see either:
>>
>> #1 0xffff01111111 in <signal handler caller>
>>
>> or:
>>
>> #1 0xffff01111111 in <signal context frame>
on this mailing list, we refer to it as:
#1 0x1234 in <signal trampoline>
so we might as well be consistent and use that.
>>
> 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.
A thing to look at one day is per-frame "info frame" information.
Andrew
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-28 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-26 7:59 Andrew Cagney
2004-04-26 19:46 ` Kevin Buettner
2004-04-26 20:48 ` David Daney
2004-04-28 16:12 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=408FB538.5060900@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=ddaney@avtrex.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox