From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 330 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2002 02:32:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32724 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2002 02:32:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.114.26.18) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2002 02:32:04 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D131B3E4D; Sun, 3 Feb 2002 21:32:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C5DF2A2.2010601@cygnus.com> Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 18:32:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20020103 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, cagney@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] remote: semantics of 'k' (kill) message References: <200202011729.g11HTY301250@reddwarf.cygnus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 > Andrew, you recently added this comment: > > ! FIXME: @emph{There is no description of how to operate when a specific > ! thread context has been selected (ie.@: does 'k' kill only that thread?)}. > > Maybe with a little discussion we can resolve this? > I believe the 'k' message is only sent in one context: > when the user asks gdb to kill the inferior process. > On a native system, that is clearly interpreted as meaning > to kill all of the threads. Is there any reason why we > should not agree that it means the same thing on an > embedded target? Hmm, yes. You're right. I shouldn't be trying to specify ``future behavour'' in the protocol. Rather it should just be specifying things based on GDB's existing behavour on a well implemented native system. Andrew