From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29084 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2008 09:03:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 29076 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Apr 2008 09:03:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx3.redhat.com (HELO mx3.redhat.com) (66.187.233.32) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:03:14 +0000 Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (viper.snap.net.nz [202.37.101.25]) by mx3.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3R92vKG015112 for <"gdb-patches@sources"@redhat.com>; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:02:58 -0400 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (208.62.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz [123.255.62.208]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DD023DB207; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:02:46 +1200 (NZST) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D12588FC6D; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 21:02:40 +1200 (NZST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18452.16686.528039.84732@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:03:00 -0000 To: Vladimir Prus Cc: "gdb-patches@sources"@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Implement thread death notification. X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.2.50.2 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00618.txt.bz2 > We now have the 'thread-created' MI notification. This patch adds a > 'thread-exited' notification to match. Are non-MI bits of this > patch OK? When I suggested this previously, we said: > > I'm not sure what you mean. If I run Gdb normally with a multi-threaded > > application, I get: > > > > [New Thread -1210639472 (LWP 7235)] > > > > when a thread is created and: > > > > [Thread -1210639472 (LWP 7235) exited] > > > > when it is terminated. > > At which point, and where in code is that message printed? It is > printed by linux-thread-db.c:detach_thread, so it's not good for > generic code. And generic code will hold on to thread until > "info thread". It's not very good if you need to issue "info thread" > to get notifications about exited thread. > > So, thread.c and its interaction with linux-thread-db.c have to > be fixed. Does it mean that this has now been fixed? -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob