This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch] Avoid deadlock in guality tests.
- From: Yvan Roux <yvan dot roux at linaro dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 17:29:43 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch] Avoid deadlock in guality tests.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAD57uCfGqe+OcM_+tvOHZYgkTdoOqdoUnwUEvHb0R=O7tJAboA at mail dot gmail dot com> <570526A2 dot 70108 at redhat dot com> <CAD57uCdax_FRB9yKJETTRN0zNRvAdisE5HiittLojVuz6AKChA at mail dot gmail dot com> <57052A27 dot 9080007 at redhat dot com>
On 6 April 2016 at 17:24, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 04:13 PM, Yvan Roux wrote:
>> On 6 April 2016 at 17:09, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On 04/06/2016 03:53 PM, Yvan Roux wrote:
>>>> Dejagnu cleanup mechanism needs to be enhanced, but I think that it
>>>> would also be better if guality tests don't get stuck and/or can be
>>>> killed easily. This patch changes GDB signals handling to nostop for
>>>> SIGSEGV, SIGINT, SIGTERM and SIGBUS. I am not sure if we need to
>>>> increase the list of signals to all the stop ones (which are not used
>>>> by GDB) or to restrict it just to SIGSEGV.
>>>
>>> I'd suggest:
>>>
>>> handle all pass nostop
>>> handle SIGINT pass nostop
>>>
>>> That would make gdb pass _all_ signals except SIGTRAP
>>
>> I've committed it already :/
>>
>> I can make the change, but isn't there cases where SIGILL is used for
>> breakpoints in GDB (I think I've seen that somewhere).
>
> True, and SIGSEGV and SIGEMT too. But GDB handles that transparently
> and won't pass such a breakpoint signal to the program, even with
> "handle pass". Only "handle SIGTRAP pass" passes a
> breakpoint/step/etc. trap to the program.
Ah ok, thanks for the explanations Pedro, I'll prepare a new patch and
validate it.
Cheers,
Yvan