From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@redhat.com>
To: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
Cc: frysk <frysk@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] Signal frame tests and fix
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:34:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47FA219C.9010807@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1207568559.3504.33.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mark,
Sounds more than worthy of a news entry!
Andrew
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This adds a couple of tests for unwinding when signals are involved. We
> would like to unwind as if at the interrupted place in the program the
> unwind stack frames continue from the signal handler (and anything
> called from the signal handler). The first test
> (testFirstFrameInSignalHandler) exposed an bug in the ptrace handling of
> single stepping. We detect when the stepping flag isn't set in a couple
> of special cases, but then forgot to inform the Instruction observer,
> which made us miss the first instruction and frame of the signal
> handler. The fix is easy and included. The second test
> (testReturnFrameAfterSignalHandler) works on x86_64, but seems to expose
> a kernel bug on x86. Filed as bug #6044 and created a ptrace-testsuite
> reproducer so hopefully Roland can help me out there. The last test
> finally shows the issue why I started this work
> (testStepSignalCallAllFrames). It steps through the whole signal handler
> and checks the call frame is correct on every step. It works on x86_64
> which had debug (eh) frame info everywhere, but fails on x86 where we
> have to detect the signal trampoline code by hand to produce a good
> unwind (similar to how we handle unwinding from PLT entries).
>
> frysk-core/frysk/pkglibdir/ChangeLog
> 2008-04-07 Mark Wielaard <mwielaard@redhat.com>
>
> * funit-loop-signal.c: New test.
>
> frysk-core/frysk/proc/live/ChangeLog
> 2008-04-07 Mark Wielaard <mwielaard@redhat.com>
>
> * LinuxPtraceTaskState.java (Stepping.handleTrappedEvent):
> Explicitly notify Instruction observers in special
> "no step bit set" cases.
>
> frysk-core/frysk/stack/ChangeLog
> 2008-04-07 Mark Wielaard <mwielaard@redhat.com>
>
> * TestSignalStepFrame.java: New tests.
>
> All tests PASS on x86_64. The last two are marked unresolved on x86.
> Working on that. And adding some more tests (for using sigaltstack and
> nested signals).
>
> Committed and pushed. No Regressions on x86 and x86_64 (fedora 8).
>
> Mark
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-07 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-07 13:29 Mark Wielaard
2008-04-07 13:34 ` 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=47FA219C.9010807@redhat.com \
--to=cagney@redhat.com \
--cc=frysk@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark@klomp.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).