Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Subject: Re: [non-stop] 08/10 linux native support
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:12:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200806252223.18858.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806252217.25796.pedro@codesourcery.com>

A Wednesday 25 June 2008 22:17:25, Pedro Alves wrote:
> A Wednesday 25 June 2008 21:19:46, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> > > @@ -1489,6 +1580,9 @@ linux_nat_resume (ptid_t ptid, int step,
> > >    /* Mark this LWP as resumed.  */
> > >    lp->resumed = 1;
> > >
> > > +  /* Remove the SIGINT mark.  Used in non-stop mode.  */
> > > +  lp->sigint = 0;
> > > +
> >
> > Confused.  Why does resuming the thread affect whether we have sent it
> > a SIGINT, but not received it back yet?
>
> Hmm, I was under the impression that it was possible to push more
> than one SIGINT into a thread's signal queue, but I just tried it, and
> it doesn't seem like it is.  This check was meant to prevent that
> happening.

I'm confused.  It does seem I can put more than one SIGINT in the
queue sometimes afterall.  (I just changed the code to do two kill's
in a row instead of one).  If so, the check is needed to prevent the
race where the thread hasn't reported the stop due to the SIGINT
yet, so is_stopped is still false, and the user is doing "interrupt"
on it (/me imagines user clicking a bunch of times on the IDE button).

The clearing on resume was just a safe place to always clear it.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-25 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-15 21:10 Pedro Alves
2008-06-25 21:17 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-06-25 22:03   ` Pedro Alves
2008-06-25 22:12     ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2008-06-25 22:52       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-06-25 23:08     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-02  3:35       ` Pedro Alves
2008-07-07 18:20         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-09  3:25           ` Michael Snyder
2008-07-09  3:47             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-09  3:55               ` Michael Snyder
2008-07-09  7:55                 ` Mark Kettenis
2008-07-09  7:56             ` Mark Kettenis
2008-07-10 15:28           ` Pedro Alves
2008-07-10 17:15             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-10 18:01               ` Pedro Alves
2008-07-10 19:59                 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-10 21:51                   ` Pedro Alves
2008-07-10 22:15                     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-07-10 23:01                       ` Pedro Alves

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=200806252223.18858.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /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