Ralf Habacker wrote:
> There is no segfault, but it does not work as expected e.g.
> pthread_mutexattr_init() does not fill the pthread_mutexattr_t struct
> given as parameter.
How does it not work? The testcase runs fine for me with no assertion
failures, neither from a prompt nor in (CVS) gdb. Even when I modify it
as follows:
--- pthread_mutexattr_init.c 2006-05-24 02:05:52.523968000 -0700
+++ pthread_mutexattr_init_2.c 2006-05-24 02:11:27.299406200 -0700
@@ -9,6 +9,9 @@ main()
{
assert(pthread_mutexattr_init(&mxAttr) == 0);
assert(pthread_mutexattr_settype(&mxAttr, PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK)
== 0);
+ int t;
+ pthread_mutexattr_gettype(&mxAttr, &t);
+ assert(t == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK);
assert(mutex == NULL);
assert(pthread_mutex_init(&mutex, &mxAttr) == 0);
assert(mutex != NULL);
...it still runs without failure.
BTW the whole "myfault" thing was devised specifically to kill the
IsBadReadPtr() junk that was used before, so asking for that back is
probably never going to happen. And with good reason too, because when
you call IsBadReadPtr is does exactly what "myfault" does, it installs a
temporary fault handler, tries to read the memory, and then removes that
temporary fault handler. Except that if you call IsBadReadPtr a bunch
of times it has to do this setup/teardown every time, instead of just
doing it once for the entire lexical scope of the function, as with
myfault.
And yes, it used to be that gdb was too dumb to recognise that these
faults in IsBadReadPtr were not actual faults, and it would print them
as spurious SIGSEGVs, just as it currently does for "myfault"s. Then it
was patched to ignore faults in kernel32.dll. Now that the handler is
in cygwin1.dll, it had to be taught to ignore faults there too, and if
you use a CVS GDB, it does.
Brian
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
