[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: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug hurd/24110] SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Jan 2019 23:24:45 +0100 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) |
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.
Samuel
- [Bug hurd/24110] New: SS_DISABLE never set in stack_t value returned by sigaltstack, bruno at clisp dot org, 2019/01/20
- [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 <=
- 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, 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