From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3455 invoked by alias); 14 Jun 2004 23:12:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3404 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2004 23:12:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Jun 2004 23:12:44 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1Ba0d9-00085W-KA; Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:12:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 23:12:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Gilliam Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Did the fix for recycled thread ids uncover another bug? Message-ID: <20040614231243.GA31016@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Gilliam , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00338.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 03:57:57PM -0700, Paul Gilliam wrote: > Forgive me if this is not the place to post this. It's kind of a > follow-up to > a thread that was here a few months ago. > > If I set a breakpoint in a thread function, then when that breakpoint is > hit, > things go bad. If instead of a breakpoint, I hit cntl-c while the thread > function is active, things work right. > > I have seen this on Intel and ppc. (The Intel was recent, but not > current. > The ppc was current). > > The strange thing is that the bug shows up on 32-bit ppc, but not 64-bit > ppc. > > I will post a follow-up with the details if someone tells me this is the > right > mail-list. You should probably use gdb@ instead. -- Daniel Jacobowitz