[PATCH 2/6] Don't reset errno/bfd_error on 'throw_perror_with_name'
Sergio Durigan Junior
sergiodj@redhat.com
Fri Feb 28 20:35:00 GMT 2020
On Friday, February 28 2020, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 2/28/20 3:29 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> Sergio> Since this hunk may be a bit controversial, I decided to split it into
>> Sergio> a separate patch. This is going to be needed by the ptrace-error
>> Sergio> feature; GDB will need to be able to access the value of errno even
>> Sergio> after a call to our 'perror'-like functions.
>>
>> I'm in favor of this. The existing code seems pretty ugly.
>
> I'm not sure in favor of relying on errno being preserved from
> throw site to catch site, with potentially multiple try/catch hops
> in between. Sergio, can you point out exactly how you're
> intending to use that?
Yeah. I caught this problem when I was testing to see if GDB would
print the ptrace fail reason when trying (unsuccessfully) to attach to a
process.
The call stack looks like:
linux_nat_target::attach
|
|--> inf_ptrace_target::attach # where ptrace fails
|
|--> throw_perror_with_name # where errno is set to 0
When 'throw_perror_with_name' calls 'error', 'linux_nat_target::attach'
catches the exception and tries to print the reason:
try
{
inf_ptrace_target::attach (args, from_tty);
}
catch (const gdb_exception_error &ex)
{
int saved_errno = errno;
pid_t pid = parse_pid_to_attach (args);
std::string reason = linux_ptrace_attach_fail_reason (pid, saved_errno);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
if (!reason.empty ())
throw_error (ex.error, "warning: %s\n%s", reason.c_str (),
ex.what ());
else
throw_error (ex.error, "%s", ex.what ());
}
However, at this point errno is already 0, so the function can't
determine the exact reason for the ptrace failure. In fact, because
errno = 0, 'linux_ptrace_attach_fail_reason' doesn't print anything,
because it thinks everything is OK!
IMO, it doesn't make sense to have errno = 0 while you're handling an
exception (which, in this case, was caused exactly because a syscall
failed, and so we expect errno to be different than 0).
Thanks,
--
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list