From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17659 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2010 14:10:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 17650 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2010 14:10:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:09:59 +0000 Received: (qmail 11673 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2010 14:09:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wind.localnet) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 8 Jan 2010 14:09:57 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: Pedro Alves Subject: Re: RFC: fix race in multiexec case Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:10:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-14-generic-pae; KDE/4.3.2; i686; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <201001051126.58970.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <201001061631.59732.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201001061631.59732.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001081709.55137.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00171.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 06 January 2010 19:31:59 Pedro Alves wrote: > On Tuesday 05 January 2010 08:26:58, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > > However, find_lwp_pid returns NULL for null_ptid, and this code segfaults. > > I attach a minimal patch that appears to fix this, but I feel uneasy about it. > > Ah, this bit runs before the almighty context_switch line. Your fix is correct. ... > > diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c > > index d8ca40d..300af62 100644 > > --- a/gdb/infrun.c > > +++ b/gdb/infrun.c > > @@ -3232,7 +3232,8 @@ targets should add new threads to the thread list themselves in non-stop mode.") > > if (ecs->event_thread->stop_signal == TARGET_SIGNAL_TRAP) > > { > > int thread_hop_needed = 0; > > - struct address_space *aspace = get_regcache_aspace (get_current_regcache ()); > > + struct address_space *aspace = > > + get_regcache_aspace (get_thread_regcache (ecs->ptid)); > > > > /* Check if a regular breakpoint has been hit before checking > > for a potential single step breakpoint. Otherwise, GDB will > > > > This is OK. What is the right way to regression test this? Do you think running testsuite with no special arguments is sufficient, or I need to try async/non-stop? - Volodya