Bug 5213 - x86_64 with 2.6.23 kernel seems to miss rt_sigaction for 32-bit code
Summary: x86_64 with 2.6.23 kernel seems to miss rt_sigaction for 32-bit code
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: systemtap
Classification: Unclassified
Component: runtime (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Unassigned
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-10-23 18:00 UTC by William Cohen
Modified: 2015-11-28 14:16 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Host: x86_64
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description William Cohen 2007-10-23 18:00:02 UTC 
When running the testsuite on x86_64 with the 2.6.23 kernel the 32-bit kernel
doesn't trigger an action for the rt_sigaction systemcall.
Comment 1 William Cohen 2007-10-23 18:08:04 UTC 
Lines of interest in the test output:


rt_signal: rt_sigaction (SIGUSR1, 0x00000000ff8ef17c, 0x0000000000000000, 8) = \
0
rt_signal: rt_sigaction (SIGUSR1, 0x00000000ff8ef17c, 0x0000000000000000, 8) = \
0
rt_signal: rt_sigaction (SIGUSR1, 0x00000000ff8ef17c, 0x0000000000000000, 8) = \
0

--------- EXPECTED and NOT MATCHED ----------
rt_signal: rt_sigaction \(SIGUSR1, {SIG_IGN}, 0x[0]+, 8\) = 0
rt_signal: rt_sigaction \(SIGUSR1, {SIG_DFL}, 0x[0]+, 8\) = 0
rt_signal: rt_sigaction \(SIGUSR1, {[x0-9a-fA-F]+, [^,]+, [x0-9a-fA-F]+, \[SIGA\
LRM\]}, 0x[0]+, 8\) = 0
FAIL: 32-bit rt_signal
Comment 2 Masami Hiramatsu 2008-02-22 22:28:17 UTC 
In tapset/syscalls2.stp, syscall.rt_sigaction uses _struct_sigaction_u($act) to
get the signal handler. On the other hand, syscall.rt_sigaction32 doesn't use
that. Thus, it can not get the actual handler address.
Comment 3 Frank Ch. Eigler 2015-11-28 14:16:06 UTC 
current tapsets cover rt_sigaction{,32} symmetrically