Re: [PATCH] stepi/nexti: skip signal handler if "handle nostop" signal arrives

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 10/14/2014 08:22 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 19:49:40 +0100
>> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>

> I think this text mixes 2 different things: (1) how the signal
> handling affects whether the signal gets to the program or not, and is
> it announced or not; and (2) the fine details of when the signal
> becomes "known" to the program and how stepping commands affect and
> are affected by that.
> 
> It might be the simplest to separate the two issues, and describe each
> one on its own.

I'll give that a try.

> 
>>>> +If a stepping command is issued after the program stops for a signal,
>>>> +and @code{pass} is in effect for that signal, @value{GDBN} steps into
>>>> +the signal's handler (if the target supports it).
>>>
>>> Again, this left me wondering.  E.g., if the program stops for a
>>> signal, then we are already in the signal handler, no?
>>
>> No, we intercept the signal before the program sees it.  See above.
> 
> But you wrote "the program stops for a signal".  "The program stops"
> means (or at least could be interpreted as meaning) the signal was
> already seen by the program, and the program then stopped.
> 
> See how this is confusing?

I don't see how one would be confused, as the paragraph just above
says "When a signal stops your program", and I feel that the that
wording I chose follows naturally from that.

But, anyway, I'll try to clarify this.

>>> So the fact
>>> that stepping commands continue there is a no-brainer, right?  Or a I
>>> again confused?
>>
>> The latter.  :-)
> 
> Then our readers will be even more confused.

Eheh, so true...  I often say that myself.

I'll come up with a new version once I have a chance.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves