Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA]: Watchpoints per thread patch
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:52:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041028195208.GA5882@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41814CCA.7080805@redhat.com>

On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 03:47:22PM -0400, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 07:17:13PM -0400, Jeff Johnston wrote:
> >
> >>Were you thinking of add_thread()?  If so, we would have to move the 
> >>calls to add_thread so they never occur before an attach because the 
> >>low-level observers will need the thread already attached.
> >
> >
> >Oh, that's a good point.  Do you think that's a reasonable change to
> >make?
> >
> 
> It is a can of worms.  I can move the add_thread call in attach_thread 
> easily enough, but there are other calls to add_thread strewn about.  For 
> example, corelow.c calls add_thread as does infrun.c when it finds a new 
> process.  I certainly don't see it being valid for either of these 
> scenarios to insert/remove all watchpoints.  My personal preference would 
> be to leave it where it is for now.

There are two separate questions here:
  - When do we need to be adding and removing watchpoints from threads
    on GNU/Linux?
  - When should an observer named "new_thread" be called?

If it's not valid to do the former action at all the latter points,
then it's not the right observer to be using.

The code in infrun is never reached for native GNU/Linux threads, btw;
I'm not sure which targets if any do reach it.  I don't believe remote
GNU/Linux threads do either.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz


  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-28 19:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-19 23:57 Jeff Johnston
2004-10-20  5:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-10-20 11:03 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-20 16:21   ` Jeff Johnston
2004-10-20 17:27 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-20 17:30   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-27 22:36     ` Jeff Johnston
2004-10-27 22:41       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-27 23:17         ` Jeff Johnston
2004-10-28 13:33           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-28 19:47             ` Jeff Johnston
2004-10-28 19:52               ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2004-10-28 20:13                 ` Jeff Johnston
2004-10-28  4:55       ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-04 18:25         ` Jeff Johnston
2004-11-04 21:21           ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-05  4:49           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-05 16:52             ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-05 18:29               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-08 21:33                 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09  1:04                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-09  2:20                     ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09  2:33                       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-09  4:53                         ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-09 15:11                         ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09 18:41                           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-11 21:22                             ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09 19:06                         ` Jeff Johnston
2004-11-09 19:31                           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-09 20:24                             ` Jim Blandy
2004-11-10  0:02                               ` Jeff Johnston
2004-11-10 14:39                                 ` Jim Blandy
2004-11-11 21:23                                 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09 20:48                             ` Jeff Johnston
2004-11-09 20:50                               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-10 19:45                               ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-10 22:08                                 ` Jeff Johnston
2004-11-10 19:43                             ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-10-20 19:27   ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-05 11:49 Ulrich Weigand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20041028195208.GA5882@nevyn.them.org \
    --to=drow@false.org \
    --cc=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=jjohnstn@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox