From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15654 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2008 17:03:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 15437 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2008 17:03:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:02:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 3074 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2008 17:02:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.local) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 11 Dec 2008 17:02:24 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Use of target_activity_function/target_activity_fd Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:03:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Tristan Gingold References: <9A0993B6-A696-4A2E-99B8-0112F0AF6089@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <9A0993B6-A696-4A2E-99B8-0112F0AF6089@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200812111702.32346.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2008-12/txt/msg00204.txt.bz2 On Thursday 11 December 2008 13:31:36, Tristan Gingold wrote: > Hi, > > the hook target_activity_function is unused according to grep. Is it > expected or should this unused code > be removed ? I've wondered this myself before. It was added in 94, Thu May 19 09:56:20 1994 Jim Kingdon (kingdon@lioth.cygnus.com) * target.c, target.h: New variables target_activity_function and target_activity_fd. * inflow.c, inferior.h: New functions set_sigio_trap and clear_sigio_trap. * inftarg.c (child_wait), procfs.c (wait_fd): Call them. This was added between GDB 4.9 and 5.0. I don't think code setting a target_activity_function has ever made it the the public GDB, at least according to the ChangeLog. 5.0 doesn't have any either, so maybe this was for some Cygnus customer project; maybe someone that worked there at the time remembers it. Insight also doesn't make use of it. In any case, given that at least two people have lost time trying to understand what good was this for, I say we nuke it, and get rid of *_sigio_trap in the process as well, which has calls that have been propagated to several targets by now. -- Pedro Alves