[binutils-gdb] Set signal to 0 after enqueue_pending_signal

[Yao Qi <qiyao at sourceware dot org>]

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=94610ec4ee630e677d15361353796cac17339c53

commit 94610ec4ee630e677d15361353796cac17339c53
Author: Yao Qi <yao.qi@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri Mar 18 14:31:40 2016 +0000

    Set signal to 0 after enqueue_pending_signal
    
    Today, we enqueue signal in linux_resume_one_lwp_throw, but set
    variable 'signal' many lines below with the comment
    
          /* Postpone any pending signal.  It was enqueued above.  */
          signal = 0;
    
    I feel difficult to associate code across many lines, and we should
    move the code close to enqueue_pending_signal call.  This is what
    this patch does in general.  After this change, variable 'signal'
    is set to zero very early, so the 'signal' value in the following
    debugging message makes no sense, so I remove it from the debugging
    message.  The function returns early if lwp->status_pending_p is
    true, so 'signal' value in the debugging message doesn't matter,
    AFAICS.  Also, I move one debugging message several lines below to
    make it close the real ptrace call,
    
      if (debug_threads)
        debug_printf ("Resuming lwp %ld (%s, signal %d, stop %s)\n",
    		  lwpid_of (thread), step ? "step" : "continue", signal,
    		  lwp->stop_expected ? "expected" : "not expected");
    
    so that the debugging message can reflect what GDBserver does.  This
    is a code refactor and only debugging messages are affected.
    
    gdb/gdbserver:
    
    2016-03-18  Yao Qi  <yao.qi@linaro.org>
    
    	* linux-low.c (linux_resume_one_lwp_throw): Set 'signal' to
    	0 if signal is enqueued.  Remove 'signal' from one debugging
    	message.  Move one debugging message to some lines below.
    	Remove code setting 'signal' to 0.

Diff:
---
 gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog   |  7 +++++++
 gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c | 30 +++++++++++++-----------------
 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog b/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog
index ecc5281..b210971 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog
@@ -1,5 +1,12 @@
 2016-03-18  Yao Qi  <yao.qi@linaro.org>
 
+	* linux-low.c (linux_resume_one_lwp_throw): Set 'signal' to
+	0 if signal is enqueued.  Remove 'signal' from one debugging
+	message.  Move one debugging message to some lines below.
+	Remove code setting 'signal' to 0.
+
+2016-03-18  Yao Qi  <yao.qi@linaro.org>
+
 	* linux-low.c (linux_low_filter_event): Remove redundant
 	WIFSTOPPED check together with linux_wstatus_maybe_breakpoint.
 
diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
index 183cdd9..f267a96 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
+++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
@@ -4164,14 +4164,19 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
 	  || lwp->pending_signals != NULL
 	  || lwp->bp_reinsert != 0
 	  || fast_tp_collecting))
-    enqueue_pending_signal (lwp, signal, info);
+    {
+      enqueue_pending_signal (lwp, signal, info);
+
+      /* Postpone any pending signal.  It was enqueued above.  */
+      signal = 0;
+    }
 
   if (lwp->status_pending_p)
     {
       if (debug_threads)
-	debug_printf ("Not resuming lwp %ld (%s, signal %d, stop %s);"
+	debug_printf ("Not resuming lwp %ld (%s, stop %s);"
 		      " has pending status\n",
-		      lwpid_of (thread), step ? "step" : "continue", signal,
+		      lwpid_of (thread), step ? "step" : "continue",
 		      lwp->stop_expected ? "expected" : "not expected");
       return;
     }
@@ -4179,11 +4184,6 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
   saved_thread = current_thread;
   current_thread = thread;
 
-  if (debug_threads)
-    debug_printf ("Resuming lwp %ld (%s, signal %d, stop %s)\n",
-		  lwpid_of (thread), step ? "step" : "continue", signal,
-		  lwp->stop_expected ? "expected" : "not expected");
-
   /* This bit needs some thinking about.  If we get a signal that
      we must report while a single-step reinsert is still pending,
      we often end up resuming the thread.  It might be better to
@@ -4213,9 +4213,6 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
 
 	  step = 1;
 	}
-
-      /* Postpone any pending signal.  It was enqueued above.  */
-      signal = 0;
     }
 
   if (fast_tp_collecting == 1)
@@ -4224,9 +4221,6 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
 	debug_printf ("lwp %ld wants to get out of fast tracepoint jump pad"
 		      " (exit-jump-pad-bkpt)\n",
 		      lwpid_of (thread));
-
-      /* Postpone any pending signal.  It was enqueued above.  */
-      signal = 0;
     }
   else if (fast_tp_collecting == 2)
     {
@@ -4243,9 +4237,6 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
 			  "moving out of jump pad single-stepping"
 			  " not implemented on this target");
 	}
-
-      /* Postpone any pending signal.  It was enqueued above.  */
-      signal = 0;
     }
 
   /* If we have while-stepping actions in this thread set it stepping.
@@ -4300,6 +4291,11 @@ linux_resume_one_lwp_throw (struct lwp_info *lwp,
       *p_sig = NULL;
     }
 
+  if (debug_threads)
+    debug_printf ("Resuming lwp %ld (%s, signal %d, stop %s)\n",
+		  lwpid_of (thread), step ? "step" : "continue", signal,
+		  lwp->stop_expected ? "expected" : "not expected");
+
   if (the_low_target.prepare_to_resume != NULL)
     the_low_target.prepare_to_resume (lwp);