From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31431 invoked by alias); 12 Dec 2010 12:24:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 31423 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Dec 2010 12:24:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-out.m-online.net (HELO mail-out.m-online.net) (212.18.0.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 12 Dec 2010 12:23:57 +0000 Received: from frontend1.mail.m-online.net (frontend1.mail.intern.m-online.net [192.168.8.180]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F9A1844253; Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:23:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from igel.home (ppp-88-217-112-56.dynamic.mnet-online.de [88.217.112.56]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7C111C00283; Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:23:53 +0100 (CET) Received: by igel.home (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4EDAFCA2A0; Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:23:53 +0100 (CET) From: Andreas Schwab To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Ulrich Weigand , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, rearnsha@arm.com, matthew.gretton-dann@arm.com Subject: Re: [rfc/rfa] Use ARM exception tables as GDB unwinder References: <20101021204306.GU8337@caradoc.them.org> <201012011645.oB1GjVXw001375@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20101212042135.GG11377@caradoc.them.org> X-Yow: I'm MENTALLY here.. but PHYSICALLY I'm purchasing NAUGAHYDE furniture in the' SUBURBS of PHOENIX!! Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 12:24:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20101212042135.GG11377@caradoc.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Sat, 11 Dec 2010 23:21:36 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg00166.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > I haven't looked at this code in a while, but isn't > nptl/sysdep-cancel.h:PSEUDO broken for non-cancellable syscalls with > many arguments? It calls DOARGS and then DO_CALL, but DO_CALL does > DOARGS again. For 0-4 arguments it doesn't matter; I don't know if > any of the 5/6/7 argument calls have a used nocancel variant. It calls DO_CALL with args == 0, so DOARGS/UNDOARGS do nothing. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different."