Re: [RFA] Async mode fixes.

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

Hi Nick, thanks for looking at this.  I was hoping you would.

On Sat, Mar 08, 2008 at 11:18:47AM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote:
> Like my patch, IMO this one looks a bit like a dog's breakfast.  It's got some
> good ideas, though, and has certainly increased my understanding of the
> asynchronous code.  Perhaps a combination of the two patches would create
> something useful.

As I understand it, it already is combined - I know Vladimir started
with a copy of your most recent async patch.  I haven't looked at his
patch yet but it may need to be broken down into some pieces.
 
> It may reduce the failures, but I suspect that's partly because it's not really
> running asynchronously.  I don't understand how it really could without adding
> another file handler for inferior events.  That doesn't mean it can't, just
> that I don't understand how it could.

Vladimir, what target were you using to test - was it "target async"?
If so, there's already a file handler relevant to inferior events;
"target async" uses the remote protocol to talk to gdbserver, so it
receives events every time there's a byte on the TCP socket.

> I think sync mode is also needed for command files.

Shouldn't you be able to use async operations from a command file?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery