From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mundt Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: fix tracing of signals Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:03:03 +0900 Message-ID: <20100213110302.GA18636@linux-sh.org> References: <20100212155306.GI24051@bombadil.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from 124x34x33x190.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp ([124.34.33.190]:53814 "EHLO master.linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752436Ab0BMLDN (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:03:13 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Kyle McMartin , vapier@gentoo.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, roland@redhat.com, "David S. Miller" , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 08:21:33AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010, Kyle McMartin wrote: > > Mike Frysinger pointed out that calling tracehook_signal_handler with > > stepping=0 missed testing the thread flags, resulting in not calling > > ptrace_notify. Fix this by testing if we're single stepping or branch > > stepping and setting the flag accordingly. > > > > Tested, seems to work. > > Hmm. All other architectures either pass in zero, or test TIF_SINGLESTEP. > > I guess TIF_BLOCKSTEP is a parisc addition, so now parisc matches x86 and > power etc, but it still makes me wonder about all those other > architectures that pass in zero. > > For the curious, that seems to be at least sparc and 64-bit (but not > 32-bit) sh. > > David? Paul? > It's a legitimate bug on sh64. We support hardware single stepping there but never tied in the thread flags when the code was merged with 32-bit, so this behaviour has existed for some time. I'll fix it up and send out patches as soon as I get a chance to test it.