From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jul 29 6:49:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 171F037B401 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 06:49:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: (from eischen@localhost) by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) id JAA18056; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 09:48:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 09:48:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen To: Arun Sharma Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: libc_r, signals and modifying sigcontext In-Reply-To: <20010729011656.A11337@sharmas.dhs.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 29 Jul 2001, Arun Sharma wrote: > On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 10:50:01AM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > Dan, > > I tried this patch against 4.3-STABLE (had to substitute > _get_curthread() with _thread_run), without success. After > the sigreturn, EIP remains the same. Can you breakpoint or add a print statement to see if the thread chosen to handle the signal is the current thread (_thread_run == thread) in the patched section below? > > @@ -1059,6 +1064,8 @@ > > sizeof(psf->uc)); > > memcpy(&psf->siginfo, &_thread_sigq[psf->signo - 1].siginfo, > > sizeof(psf->siginfo)); > > + psf->restore_context = ((thread == _get_curthread()) && > > + (thread->ctxtype == CTX_UC)); > Should I be testing against -current ? No, -stable should be fine (other than the _get_curthread() vs _thread_run diff) -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message