This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: strace and sigprocmask
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 10:31:26 -0400
- Subject: Re: strace and sigprocmask
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <f5bzjir5cx4 dot fsf at troutbeck dot inf dot ed dot ac dot uk>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 01:55:51PM +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>Running on Windows 8.1, with 32-bit Cygwin v1.7.29.
>I've taken straces of a problematic area of xemacs, tidied them, and
>am trying to locate significant differences.
>I'm seeing something I don't understand, which isn't causing a crash
>so probably isn't significant, but I'd like to understand it better.
>strace 1 has:
> [main] PID1 sigprocmask: 0 = sigprocmask(2647444, 0xNULL, 0xNULL)
>where strace 2 has:
> [main] PID1 sigprocmask: 0 = sigprocmask(2649272, 0xNULL, 0xADDR)
>Similar lines appear frequently in both straces.
>Either I don't understand strace output, or this is bizarre -- the
>first arg to sigprocmask should always be 0, 1 or 2, right?
>I'd welcome any help in understanding how I should be reading this,
>and more generally, how I could have found the answer to my question
This is a a bug (now fixed) in the source. The first argument to
sigprocmask was not being sent to the strace printf, pushing all of the
As to how you could have found the answer, it's the standard answer for
free software projects - look at the source.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple