This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi, Other than the comments below, I've updated the patch to address your review. Thanks! Yit July 25, 2012 On Jul 25, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Khoo Yit Phang wrote: > Hi, > > On Jul 25, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>>> "Yit" == Khoo Yit Phang <khooyp@cs.umd.edu> writes: >> >> Yit> +static sig_t gdbpy_saved_sigint_handler; >> >> Rather than use a global, it seems a bit better to me to store the old >> signal handler in the python_env, and then restore it from there. > > Actually, that's not the behavior I'm going for: instead of restoring the old signal handler, I'm preserving whatever changes to the signal handler that has been made in the nested Python context (if it can ever happen). E.g.: > > (gdb) ... at this point, it's the FOO handler ... > (gdb) py >>>> gdb.execute("... something that changes the signal handler to BAR ...") >>>> ^D > (gdb) ... at this point, it's the BAR handler ... > >> Yit> + gdbpy_suspend_sigint_handler (); >> >> This addition handles one instance of the python->gdb transition, but >> there are many more to fix. > > I think it's okay to handle just the long-running python->gdb transitions, or those where SIGINT is critical to correct functionality. Are there other long-running python->gdb transitions that I should fix? > > Yit > July 25, 2012
Attachment:
python-handle-sigint
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |