From: David Smith <dsmith@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, RFA] multi-arch PREPARE_TO_PROCEED()
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 07:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AC88BF9.1060009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3AC4E993.7B23D144@cygnus.com>
Andrew,
Thanks for taking the time to look at this patch. See comments below.
Andrew Cagney wrote:
> David Smith wrote:
>
> David two thoughts:
>
> o is the parameter ``select_it'' needed?
Not really, since the only call to PREPARE_TO_PROCEED (in infrun.c) always
passes a 1. However:
- This macro is already documented in gdbint.texinfo as taking the
"select_it" parameter.
- If I change the call interface, the possibilities are much higher that I'll
screw up the 4 existing implementations of PREPARE_TO_PROCEED. Three of them
(hppa-tdep.c, lin-lwp.c, linux-thread.c) should be easy enough to compile,
but the last one, m3-nat.c, will not be easy. I've searched and can't find a
Mach3 system anywhere (and that port doesn't cross-compile).
I was trying not to affect the existing implementations.
>
> o In your opinion, is there any reason
> to have anything other than the
> generic_prepare_to_proceed()?
>
> I'm thinking that we should dump the HP/UX and Linux implementations and
> instead, always use your code. So ... can someone test David's change
> under linux threads?
There is no logical reason why the generic_prepare_to_proceed() couldn't
suffice for the 4 existing ports that define PREPARE_TO_PROCEED(). However,
the actual implementation gets a bit tricky.
None of the 4 existing implementations (hppa-tdep.c, lin-lwp.c,
linux-thread.c, m3-nat.c) are multi-arched. The 4 existing implementations
also are a bit odd. The Mach3 (m3-nat.c) and HP/UX (hppa-tdep.c)
implementations are quite odd in the way they figure out if the threads have
been switched. The two linux implementations (linux-thread.c and lin-lwp.c)
are fairly normal, with the newest Linux implementation (lin-lwp.c) being
pretty straight-forward, except for its integration with thread-db.c.
All 4 implementations switch threads in different ways. Here's a bad ascii
chart of what they do (and don't do). The list of things to do I got from
switch_to_thread() (in thread.c).
hppa-tdep.c linux-thread.c lin-lwp.c m3-nat.c
Switch "inferior_pid"? X X
Flush cached frames? X X
Flush register data? X X
Update "stop_pc"?
Select a new frame?
linux-thread.c just sets an internal variable (linuxthreads_step_pid) and
then does some magic with that variable in linuxthreads_resume(). m3-nat.c
calls a Mach3 specific switch_to_thread() function, which doesn't change
inferior_pid at all (?).
>
> Anyway, I'm ok with the multi-arch part (both with and without the
> ``select_it'' parameter) and the change to infrun.c.
>
> With respect to the possibility of dumping the HP/UX and linux
> implementations - MichaelS or MarkK?
>
> Andrew
>
I think I've read that the HP/UX port compiles, but can't actually debug
programs, so testing that change would be quite difficult...
--
David Smith
dsmith@redhat.com
Red Hat, Inc.
http://www.redhat.com
256.704.9222 (direct)
256.837.3839 (fax)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-04-02 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-29 18:25 David Smith
2001-03-30 12:16 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-04-02 7:28 ` David Smith [this message]
2001-04-04 14:54 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-04-06 10:55 ` David Smith
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=3AC88BF9.1060009@redhat.com \
--to=dsmith@redhat.com \
--cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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