[PATCH] strace: add :signal option to efault

[Dmitry V. Levin]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 10:01:58AM +0100, Seraphime Kirkovski wrote:
> This extends the -e fault capability with a :signal option which
> delivers a signal on entry of the specified syscall.
> :error and :signal are mutually exclusive; it does not make sense to
> interrupt a syscall with a signal and stipulate an error code.
> Currently :signal has greater precedence than :error.

Are they really mutually exclusive?  What if the signal is handled?
Why can't we inject both a signal and a fault into the same syscall?


-- 
ldv
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.strace.io/pipermail/strace-devel/attachments/20161226/138f62c8/attachment.bin>