From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6315 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2006 15:13:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 6307 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Jan 2006 15:13:50 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:13:48 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F0KR0-0000CD-8Y; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:13:46 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:13:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: target_create_inferior that does not call proceed Message-ID: <20060121151345.GA600@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060116200238.GA11566@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00277.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 01:22:37PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:02:38 -0500 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > This patch adjusts the to_create_inferior target method so that the inferior > > is implicitly stopped at the end of it, instead of running. > > Daniel, could you please describe in some detail what happens now on > Posix systems when to_create_inferior is called, and in particular as > result of the call to `proceed'? AFAIK, the inferior is not actually > running until you say "run", but your message seems to indicate > otherwise? > > I need these details to decide whether your suggested change in > go32-nat.c is the right thing to do. There's the prog_has_started > flag there that go32_create_inferior is setting after the call to > proceed. You suggest to remove the call to proceed, but the flag is > still being set, and I need to make up my mind whether this could > spell some trouble. If it does, we might need a new target op to > handle that. > > I tried to understand what exactly does proceed do when called from > to_create_inferior, but got lost in twisty little passages, all alike. > I need help. The only call site for target_create_inferior is at the bottom of run_command_1. It first creates a new inferior, and then calls proceed, which transitions the inferior from stopped to executing. prog_has_started is only set when the program is created and cleared when it is killed, so I think the patch is right - but I don't understand all the DOS-specific bits of go32-nat.c. > > Another benefit of this is that I could finally implement a command I've > > wanted for ages when debugging startup code: create the inferior but don't > > run it, and give me my prompt back. That's not in this patch only because I > > couldn't think of a name for it! I'd call it "start", but well... already > > in use. Would anyone else find this useful? If so, would you care to > > suggest a name? > > "create" or "create-inferior" sounds like a good name. > > We would need a docs patch if we add a new command, of course. Of course. Hmm, I like both of your suggestions. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery