diff options
author | Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> | 2014-10-27 20:24:59 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> | 2014-10-27 20:26:12 +0000 |
commit | e5f8a7cc2d376c81749b6e4a4efc034201cf683c (patch) | |
tree | dde215ef253ca851fe7fa3ee9e2d849a1e211b06 /gdb/infrun.c | |
parent | bf67003b4567600ed3022a439207ac8f26454f91 (diff) | |
download | gdb-e5f8a7cc2d376c81749b6e4a4efc034201cf683c.zip gdb-e5f8a7cc2d376c81749b6e4a4efc034201cf683c.tar.gz gdb-e5f8a7cc2d376c81749b6e4a4efc034201cf683c.tar.bz2 |
stepi/nexti: skip signal handler if "handle nostop" signal arrives
I noticed that "si" behaves differently when a "handle nostop" signal
arrives while the step is in progress, depending on whether the
program was stopped at a breakpoint when "si" was entered.
Specifically, in case GDB needs to step off a breakpoint, the handler
is skipped and the program stops in the next "mainline" instruction.
Otherwise, the "si" stops in the first instruction of the signal
handler.
I was surprised the testsuite doesn't catch this difference. Turns
out gdb.base/sigstep.exp covers a bunch of cases related to stepping
and signal handlers, but does not test stepi nor nexti, only
step/next/continue.
My first reaction was that stopping in the signal handler was the
correct thing to do, as it's where the next user-visible instruction
that is executed is. I considered then "nexti" -- a signal handler
could be reasonably considered a subroutine call to step over, it'd
seem intuitive to me that "nexti" would skip it.
But then, I realized that signals that arrive while a plain/line
"step" is in progress _also_ have their handler skipped. A user might
well be excused for being confused by this, given:
(gdb) help step
Step program until it reaches a different source line.
And the signal handler's sources will be in different source lines,
after all.
I think that having to explain that "stepi" steps into handlers, (and
that "nexti" wouldn't according to my reasoning above), while "step"
does not, is a sign of an awkward interface.
E.g., if a user truly is interested in stepping into signal handlers,
then it's odd that she has to either force the signal to "handle
stop", or recall to do "stepi" whenever such a signal might be
delivered. For that use case, it'd seem nicer to me if "step" also
stepped into handlers.
This suggests to me that we either need a global "step-into-handlers"
setting, or perhaps better, make "handle pass/nopass stop/nostop
print/noprint" have have an additional axis - "handle
stepinto/nostepinto", so that the user could configure whether
handlers for specific signals should be stepped into.
In any case, I think it's simpler (and thus better) for all step
commands to behave the same. This commit thus makes "si/ni" skip
handlers for "handle nostop" signals that arrive while the command was
already in progress, like step/next do.
To be clear, nothing changes if the program was stopped for a signal,
and the user enters a stepping command _then_ -- GDB still steps into
the handler. The change concerns signals that don't cause a stop and
that arrive while the step is in progress.
Tested on x86_64 Fedora 20, native and gdbserver.
gdb/
2014-10-27 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* infrun.c (handle_signal_stop): Also skip handlers when a random
signal arrives while handling a "stepi" or a "nexti". Set the
thread's 'step_after_step_resume_breakpoint' flag.
gdb/doc/
2014-10-27 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.texinfo (Continuing and Stepping): Add cross reference to
info on stepping and signal handlers.
(Signals): Explain stepping and signal handlers. Add context
index entry, and cross references.
gdb/testsuite/
2014-10-27 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* gdb.base/sigstep.c (dummy): New global.
(main): Issue a couple writes to the new global.
* gdb.base/sigstep.exp (get_next_pc, test_skip_handler): New
procedures.
(skip_over_handler): Use test_skip_handler.
(top level): Call skip_over_handler for stepi and nexti too.
(breakpoint_over_handler): Use test_skip_handler.
(top level): Call breakpoint_over_handler for stepi and nexti too.
Diffstat (limited to 'gdb/infrun.c')
-rw-r--r-- | gdb/infrun.c | 7 |
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c index 90a3123..df053e2 100644 --- a/gdb/infrun.c +++ b/gdb/infrun.c @@ -4463,9 +4463,9 @@ handle_signal_stop (struct execution_control_state *ecs) return; } - if (ecs->event_thread->control.step_range_end != 0 - && ecs->event_thread->suspend.stop_signal != GDB_SIGNAL_0 - && pc_in_thread_step_range (stop_pc, ecs->event_thread) + if (ecs->event_thread->suspend.stop_signal != GDB_SIGNAL_0 + && (pc_in_thread_step_range (stop_pc, ecs->event_thread) + || ecs->event_thread->control.step_range_end == 1) && frame_id_eq (get_stack_frame_id (frame), ecs->event_thread->control.step_stack_frame_id) && ecs->event_thread->control.step_resume_breakpoint == NULL) @@ -4485,6 +4485,7 @@ handle_signal_stop (struct execution_control_state *ecs) "single-step range\n"); insert_hp_step_resume_breakpoint_at_frame (frame); + ecs->event_thread->step_after_step_resume_breakpoint = 1; /* Reset trap_expected to ensure breakpoints are re-inserted. */ ecs->event_thread->control.trap_expected = 0; keep_going (ecs); |