From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3193 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2008 12:33:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 3103 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jun 2008 12:32:53 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:32:33 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423CA98366; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:32:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C1C98337; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:32:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KCD7v-00061h-Fm; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 08:32:31 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:58:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Make the remote target always register a thread Message-ID: <20080627123231.GB22867@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200806260008.08596.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20080626024814.GB20206@caradoc.them.org> <200806271258.08547.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200806271258.08547.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00496.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:58:08PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > It will take a while to make all targets consistent, > so although I'd prefer to fix them all, practically speaking, the > assertion should be removed for now, and perhaps leave a comment > there so when we do have all targets consistent, the assert will be > catching a real bug. > > The fix seems to me to be a one or two liner, > but, as I've said at gdb@, I don't know if we should output > thread-id=0 or not output thread-id at all, or maybe even > output thread-id=all, as if there are no threads in the list, > this is the special case of there being only one "task" really, > but the target is not registering it. > > (OTOH, having an assert at least makes it easy to see > which target needs to be changed.) Let's just keep in mind that we shouldn't ship a release of GDB with this problem... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery