From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20917 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2019 22:33:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 20909 invoked by uid 89); 16 Apr 2019 22:33:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=joel, thr X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 22:33:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4E1B56223 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:33:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id I83ceUS76MoK for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:33:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tron.gnat.com (tron.gnat.com [IPv6:2620:20:4000:0:46a8:42ff:fe0e:e294]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FB656163 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:33:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by tron.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 4233) id 9EE6740D; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:33:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Windows native GDB event handling enhancement Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 22:33:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1555453982-77808-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00279.txt.bz2 Hello, This patch series introduces two patches: * [RFA 1/2][master+8.3] (Windows) fix thr != nullptr assert failure in delete_thread_1 * [RFA 2/2][master only] gdb/windows-nat.c: Get rid of main_thread_id global I started working on those when I realized that GDB 8.3 showed some crashes which seemed more frequent than the typical instability we might have seen from time to time. And sure enough, I found something. It's split into two patches, although conceptually, they should be one patch. The reason for that is that the change in its globality is, in my opinion, potentially risky, because it is a bit of a jump in the unknown, because I don't really know the reasons behind doing the things the way we used to do them. What I know is that what I propose seems to make better sense to me, and seems cleaner too; but there might be something behind them I didn't know. So I've extracted the part that avoids the crash into a first patch, knowing that this part seems clear enough to me that the risk, if any, should be at worst that we crash later on. In a couple of weeks of nightly testing on various Windows versions, though, I haven't seen it happen, so I think we're good. That way, this patch could be reviewed on its own, and eventually find its way to the gdb-8.3-branch as well. Then the second patch, which complete the first one, could be poushed to master. It's potentially more disruptive, which is why we give it more time in master, and don't consider it for gdb-8.3-branch. -- Joel