From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25152 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2009 19:43:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 25099 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Feb 2009 19:43:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:43:19 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0AE10A30; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:43:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF431007D; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:43:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LbKEO-0005b6-AI; Sun, 22 Feb 2009 14:43:16 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vinay Sridhar Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch] Fix gdb failure to access tls data for parent thread Message-ID: <20090222194316.GA21483@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vinay Sridhar , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20090204132851.GA9935@caradoc.them.org> <1234341068.13249.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090211155300.GA22689@caradoc.them.org> <1234417406.6489.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090215182233.GA24660@caradoc.them.org> <1234779868.4861.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090216150403.GA27072@caradoc.them.org> <1234849907.4215.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090217132951.GA32041@caradoc.them.org> <1235102359.4719.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1235102359.4719.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> 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: 2009-02/txt/msg00420.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 09:29:19AM +0530, Vinay Sridhar wrote: > I placed a break on "add_thread" as you suggested. It doesn't seem to be > hit at all, for any of the threads. > BTW, I'm using GNU gdb (GDB) 6.8.50.20090216. At the time of the original error, are all your threads in the thread list? GDB's internal thread_list variable, not the result of "info threads", which will check for new threads. If they are, and they do not have private info set, what added them to the thread list? I missed one function; maybe they were added by add_thread_silent? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery