From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27843 invoked by alias); 11 Feb 2015 16:40:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 27790 invoked by uid 89); 11 Feb 2015 16:40:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:40:22 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1BGeJ07018035 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:40:19 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1BGeIrR007552; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:40:18 -0500 Message-ID: <54DB85F1.3070901@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:40:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix signal trampoline detection/unwinding on recent FreeBSD/i386 and FreeBSD/amd64 References: <11386216.Yv1qECs4Mc@ralph.baldwin.cx> <1778386.0IyHlhpa5R@ralph.baldwin.cx> <54DA9572.1010304@redhat.com> <1764587.lQfaPVNLAm@ralph.baldwin.cx> In-Reply-To: <1764587.lQfaPVNLAm@ralph.baldwin.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00314.txt.bz2 On 02/11/2015 03:32 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > Actually, this does sound far simpler. I was simply updating the sigtramp > code that was already present. I can certainly work on changing both i386 > and amd64 to do this instead if that is the preferred method (and it seems to > be from looking at other targets). Yep, that's the preferred method. That'd be great. Thanks, Pedro Alves