Roland McGrath wrote:
I certainly have no objection in principle. I doubt that any x86 userland
apps expect certain si_code values for SIGTRAP now, since the existing
values are not of any real use. (Signal handlers get the thread.trap_no and
thread.error_code values from hardware to guess from
I certainly have no objection in principle. I doubt that any x86 userland
apps expect certain si_code values for SIGTRAP now, since the existing
values are not of any real use. (Signal handlers get the thread.trap_no and
thread.error_code values from hardware to guess from, and debuggers via
ptra
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 07:55:01PM +0530, Srinivasa Ds wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 September 2008 17:00:01 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > > applied to [the new topic] tip/core/signal, thanks Srinivasa! There
> > > are some other pending x86 signal changes already, so i based
> > > tip/core/signal on tip/x86/
* Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -tip testing found the following build error with the attached
> > config:
>
> Ingo, Reproduced build break issue with your config on tip tree. It
> was a costly overlook to miss one header file. I included it in this
> patch and tested it out.
t
On Tuesday 23 September 2008 17:00:01 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > applied to [the new topic] tip/core/signal, thanks Srinivasa! There
> > are some other pending x86 signal changes already, so i based
> > tip/core/signal on tip/x86/signal.
>
> -tip testing found the following build error with the attach
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Currently a SIGTRAP can denote any one of below reasons.
> > - Breakpoint hit
> > - H/W debug register hit
> > - Single step
> > - Signal sent through kill() or rasie()
> >
> > Architectures like powerpc/parisc provides infrastructure
* Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 22 September 2008 20:24:04 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > --- linux-2.6.27-rc7.orig/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
> > > +++ linux-2.6.27-rc7/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
> >
> > please do not send p
On Monday 22 September 2008 20:24:04 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- linux-2.6.27-rc7.orig/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
> > +++ linux-2.6.27-rc7/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
>
> please do not send patches that modify include/asm/ files, the
> include/asm
* Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- linux-2.6.27-rc7.orig/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
> +++ linux-2.6.27-rc7/arch/ia64/include/asm/siginfo.h
please do not send patches that modify include/asm/ files, the
include/asm-x86/ file should be modified instead.
(this problem will go aw
On Monday 22 September 2008 16:12:02 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> no fundamental objections - assuming existing x86 apps have not grown an
> ABI dependency on the existing send_sigtrap() semantics. (Debuggers and
> JITs would be a candidate for such dependencies.)
>
Assuming that no ABI dependency exist b
* Srinivasa Ds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently a SIGTRAP signal can denote any one of below reasons.
> - Breakpoint hit
> - H/W debug register hit
> - Single step
> - SIGTRAP signal sent through kill() or rasie()
>
> Architectures like powerpc/parisc provides infra
11 matches
Mail list logo
