Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix internal-error on dead LWPs with no associated 	thread
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:35:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090629213333.GA3295@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200906291941.52129.pedro@codesourcery.com>

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:41:51 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote:
>  1 - I'm not convinced currently that adding threads immediately to the list in
>      all-stop mode in linux_handle_extended_wait is a good idea.  See here for
>      thoughts around that:
> 
>       http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2009-05/msg00067.html

I do not share this opinion - not attaching short-lived threads should not be
allowed for performance reasons.  When such short-lived thread crashes GDB
should catch such crash.


>  2 - If the target has let the thread escape this far without having added it to
>      the list, *and* the target needs to book-keep extra thread info associated
>      with the thread structure, than your patch looks like paparing over a bug.
>      It's just a simple to handle it in the target's target_wait implementation,
>      just before returning an event.
> 
>  3 - I really just meant to just remove this whole block:
> 
> -  if (ecs->new_thread_event)
> -    {
> -      if (non_stop)
> -	/* Non-stop assumes that the target handles adding new threads
> -	   to the thread list.  */
> -	internal_error (__FILE__, __LINE__, "\
> -targets should add new threads to the thread list themselves in non-stop mode.");
> -
> -      /* We may want to consider not doing a resume here in order to
> -	 give the user a chance to play with the new thread.  It might
> -	 be good to make that a user-settable option.  */
> -
> -      /* At this point, all threads are stopped (happens automatically
> -	 in either the OS or the native code).  Therefore we need to
> -	 continue all threads in order to make progress.  */
> -
> -      if (!ptid_equal (ecs->ptid, inferior_ptid))
> -	context_switch (ecs->ptid);
> -      target_resume (RESUME_ALL, 0, TARGET_SIGNAL_0);
> -      prepare_to_wait (ecs);
> -      return;
> -    }

Such a review for myself why:

On GNU/Linux if linux_test_for_tracefork() fails then the new LWP is left
unstopped - so it needs no target_resume.

On GNU/Linux if linux_test_for_tracefork() succeeds then the new LWP is left
unstopped immediately after catching its clone event by
linux_handle_extended_wait as it is called with STOPPING 0.  So no
target_resume is needed.

For other OSes expectin no one stops the new LWP.

(I currently do not have an opinion on this removal, it is just a dead code.)


Thanks,
Jan


  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-29 21:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-29 10:09 Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-29 10:35 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-29 17:51   ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-29 18:30     ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-29 18:59       ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-29 18:31     ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-29 18:41       ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-29 21:35         ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2009-06-29 21:42           ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-29 21:48             ` Jan Kratochvil

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=20090629213333.GA3295@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net \
    --to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    /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