Re: [gdbserver] Problems trying to resume dead threads

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 09:45:46PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> It seems the "read" errors are just artifacts: because of the first
> error (on writing the register), the "error" call performs a longjmp
> to the toplevel, which leaves things in a somewhat strange state.
> 
> The only "real" errors I see (in addition to the one in
> linux_resume_one_process) are the cases in regsets_store_inferior_registers
> (which is already a warning) and usr_store_inferior_registers (which
> is not).
> 
> In any case, I don't think these should be even warnings for ESRCH:
> showing a warning in a situation that is completely normal and in
> fact handled correctly would just confuse users IMO.
> 
> I'd propose to just silently ignore ESRCH errors while writing registers
> (in addition to your patch).  What do you think?

I think that's acceptable, though not ideal.  ESRCH can mean "the
program is gone", or for ptrace it can mean "the program is not
stopped".  So there are a class of bugs in gdbserver which can lead to
the ESRCH error path.  But distinguishing them from this case is quite
difficult.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery