From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31121 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2011 15:17:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 31096 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Aug 2011 15:17:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,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; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:17:28 +0000 Received: (qmail 2014 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2011 15:17:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 29 Aug 2011 15:17:27 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix target-async SIGTTOU stop (PR 12260) Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:17:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-11-generic; KDE/4.7.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Matt Rice , Jan Kratochvil References: <20110823193156.GA30724@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201108291617.25592.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: 2011-08/txt/msg00567.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 24 August 2011 06:24:36, Matt Rice wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Jan Kratochvil > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > it is difficult to play with `set target-async on' as it usually SIGTTOU stops > > at various places. > > http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12260 > > > > $ ./gdb -nx -ex 'set target-async on' -ex start ./gdb > > [...] > > Starting program: .../gdb/gdb > > [1]+ Stopped ./gdb -nx -ex 'set target-async on' -ex start ./gdb > > > > If it has a regression it IMO only means there is missing > > target_terminal_inferior call at some other place. > > > > No regressions on {x86_64,x86_64-m32,i686}-fedora16pre-linux-gnu. But I was > > unable to reproduce the problem under DejaGnu so the regression test may not > > be meaningful. > > > > Not going to check it in without a review. > > > > Not really a review, just thought i'd mention this is also fixed by > the following patch > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-08/msg00235.html I was going to look at Jan's patch, and I'm a bit confused on the state of things, and the state of Matt's patch --- there was a follow up, which had a problem. Is the msg00235.html version the final one instead? > this also fixes the original report of PR 10720 which seems to be a > dupe, not sure about the latter reports in 10720. > the test cases i added do not cover this either. By "this" you mean Jan's or yours? > > to quote from elsewhere in that thread > matt> more information on PR 10720, which I'd had random difficulties > matt> reproducing, I managed to figure out why, the process being attached > matt> to must be on the same tty as the gdb process to reproduce it. > matt> Haven't been able to reproduce that in the testsuite though. > > my guess is that deja-gnu doesn't meet this requirement to be able to > reproduce it. > -- Pedro Alves