public inbox for gdb@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Arnez <arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Strange behavior of sigstep-threads.exp?
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <878vacnlem.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)

On x86-64 with upstream GDB, I'm observing what I consider strange
behavior of the sigstep-threads.exp test case.

Here's an excerpt from the log file:

  32        var++;                /* step-1 */
  (gdb) disable $step1
  (gdb) step

  Program received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.

  Program received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.

  Program received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.

  Program received signal SIGUSR1, User defined signal 1.
  33        tgkill (getpid (), gettid (), SIGUSR1);       /* step-2 */

It seems that running from step-1 to step-2 produced four SIGUSR1.  And
in total ca. 3 times as many signals are encountered than we pass
tgkill()'s:

  $ grep tgkill gdb.log | wc
      100    1000    5900
  $ grep 'Program received signal SIGUSR1' gdb.log | wc
      310    2480   17670

From the code I wouldn't expect that.  Is this a known bug or expected
behavior?  Note that the test case doesn't fail, since it doesn't care
about the number of incoming signals.

On s390x the test case actually fails sometimes.  In those cases, when
stepping from step-1 to step-2, a ton of SIGUSR1 are indicated, and then
the inferior seems to stop at the closing brace of the handler()
function instead of the tgkill().

             reply	other threads:[~2012-11-08 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-08 15:51 Andreas Arnez [this message]
2012-11-12 16:38 ` Pedro Alves
2012-11-13 15:21   ` Andreas Arnez
2012-11-14 16:15     ` Pedro Alves
2012-11-21 18:47       ` Andreas Arnez
2012-11-21 19:19         ` Pedro Alves

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=878vacnlem.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=palves@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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).