From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-80288-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22670 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2011 13:42:00 -0000
Received: (qmail 22660 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Apr 2011 13:41:59 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
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; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:41:55 +0000
Received: (qmail 18892 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2011 13:41:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 12 Apr 2011 13:41:55 -0000
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GDB checkpoint can't/shouldn't be possible with multiple threads on Linux
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:42:00 -0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-28-generic; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; )
Cc: Kevin Pouget <kevin.pouget@gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=pTUVx5iHkb0-0oZyKJHNbALY2SA@mail.gmail.com> <201104121355.11278.pedro@codesourcery.com> <BANLkTikFzxv7M3gnkw=RHEqL0QtzRysxiw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikFzxv7M3gnkw=RHEqL0QtzRysxiw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201104121441.56034.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-04/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2

Small nit I should have caught before: 

On Tuesday 12 April 2011 14:27:49, Kevin Pouget wrote:
> +static int
> +inf_has_multiple_thread_cb (struct thread_info *tp, void *data)
> +{
> +  int *has_multiple_threads = (int *) data;

can you rename this local as well, in line with the other
local in the other function?  To "count", or "count_p", or something
like that.  Thanks.  (pre-approved)

> +  if (current_inferior ()->pid == ptid_get_pid (tp->ptid))
> +    (*has_multiple_threads)++;
> +
> +  /* Stop the iteration if multiple threads have been detected.  */
> +  return *has_multiple_threads > 1;
> +}
> +
> +/* Return true if the current inferior is multi-threaded.  */
> +
> +static int
> +inf_has_multiple_threads (void)
> +{
> +  int count = 0;
> +
> +  iterate_over_threads (inf_has_multiple_thread_cb, &count);


-- 
Pedro Alves