From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Possible bug in xfns.c Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:47:09 +0100 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109430347 32125 80.91.229.2 (26 Feb 2005 15:05:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 26 16:05:46 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D53Vj-0002gb-Lq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:05:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D53ni-00061L-1b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:24:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D53l2-0002mY-PH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:21:28 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D53k6-0001vu-4a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:20:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D53jR-000111-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:19:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D53Dr-0003Ak-0s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:47:11 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D53Dq-0003QG-HL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2005 09:47:10 -0500 Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33837 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33837 Throwing a signal restores interrupt_input_blocked to the state of the recording of the stack frame. In xfns.c, line 5207, we have a BLOCK_INPUT. In line 5283 we have record_unwind_protect (clean_up_file_dialog, make_save_value (dialog, 0)); That means that clean_up_file_dialog will get called in case of an abort, and x_file_dialog will return with the value of interrupt_input_blocked increased by one as opposed to the time of the call. Shouldn't record_unwind_protect be enclosed with UNBLOCK_INPUT/BLOCK_INPUT? Note: I don't have much of a clue about the code, I am just trying to dig for an abort. The above certainly is not involved in the abort, but while I am at it... -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum