[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by s
From: |
Svante Signell |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack |
Date: |
Mon, 28 Jan 2019 20:07:50 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.30.4-1 |
On Sat, 2019-01-26 at 23:24 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Samuel Thibault, le jeu. 24 janv. 2019 13:19:52 +0100, a ecrit:
> > Svante Signell, le jeu. 24 janv. 2019 12:11:25 +0100, a ecrit:
> > > However, all these tests are still failing, but now mainly with SIGABRT or
> > > "signal 20 (SIGCHLD) received but handler not on signal stack" or "signal
> > > 30
> > > (SIGUSR1) received but handler not on signal stack".
> > >
> > > So I think there are still more bugs to hunt down.
> >
> > Yep, but there is most probably some progress here, and possibly it'll
> > be easier to track down such explicit abort than a SIGILL from out of
> > space.
>
> I guess this is printed from ./src/libgo/runtime/go-signal.c? It'd be
> useful to dump the content of st and print sp.
(gdb) p sp
$1 = 654468
(gdb) p st
$2 = {ss_sp = 0x0, ss_size = 0, ss_flags = 0}
- [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, (continued)
- [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, address@hidden, 2019/01/20
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/22
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Joshua Branson, 2019/01/23
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/23
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/23
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/24
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/24
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/25
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/25
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/26
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack,
Svante Signell <=
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Samuel Thibault, 2019/01/28
- Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, Svante Signell, 2019/01/28