diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog index 73fa3efc24..7af4416837 100644 --- a/gdb/ChangeLog +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +2004-02-05 Mark Kettenis + + * infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Allow for breakpoint + instructions to generate a SIGSEGV in addition to SIGTRAP, SIGILL + and SIGEMT. Update comments. + * NEWS (Revised SPARC target): Mention support for non-executable + stack. + 2004-02-04 Mark Kettenis * target.h (target_object): Add TARGET_OBJECT_WCOOKIE. diff --git a/gdb/NEWS b/gdb/NEWS index f24f592db5..9ee0cec922 100644 --- a/gdb/NEWS +++ b/gdb/NEWS @@ -19,7 +19,9 @@ you should upgrade gdbserver on the remote side. The SPARC target has been completely revised, incorporating the FreeBSD/sparc64 support that was added for GDB 6.0. As a result -support for LynxOS and SunOS 4 has been dropped. +support for LynxOS and SunOS 4 has been dropped. Calling functions +from within GDB on operating systems with a non-executable stack +(Solaris, OpenBSD) now works. * New C++ demangler diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c index f16f42395f..ea83f13f1d 100644 --- a/gdb/infrun.c +++ b/gdb/infrun.c @@ -1975,15 +1975,20 @@ handle_inferior_event (struct execution_control_state *ecs) will be made according to the signal handling tables. */ /* First, distinguish signals caused by the debugger from signals - that have to do with the program's own actions. - Note that breakpoint insns may cause SIGTRAP or SIGILL - or SIGEMT, depending on the operating system version. - Here we detect when a SIGILL or SIGEMT is really a breakpoint - and change it to SIGTRAP. */ + that have to do with the program's own actions. Note that + breakpoint insns may cause SIGTRAP or SIGILL or SIGEMT, depending + on the operating system version. Here we detect when a SIGILL or + SIGEMT is really a breakpoint and change it to SIGTRAP. We do + something similar for SIGSEGV, since a SIGSEGV will be generated + when we're trying to execute a breakpoint instruction on a + non-executable stack. This happens for call dummy breakpoints + for architectures like SPARC that place call dummies on the + stack. */ if (stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_TRAP || (breakpoints_inserted && (stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_ILL + || stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_SEGV || stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_EMT)) || stop_soon == STOP_QUIETLY || stop_soon == STOP_QUIETLY_NO_SIGSTOP) @@ -2046,10 +2051,14 @@ handle_inferior_event (struct execution_control_state *ecs) If someone ever tries to get get call dummys on a non-executable stack to work (where the target would stop - with something like a SIGSEG), then those tests might need to - be re-instated. Given, however, that the tests were only + with something like a SIGSEGV), then those tests might need + to be re-instated. Given, however, that the tests were only enabled when momentary breakpoints were not being used, I - suspect that it won't be the case. */ + suspect that it won't be the case. + + NOTE: kettenis/2004-02-05: Indeed such checks don't seem to + be necessary for call dummies on a non-executable stack on + SPARC. */ if (stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_TRAP) ecs->random_signal