From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Daniel, thread vs. fork question.
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 01:08:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <404FBC18.4090909@redhat.com> (raw)
Hey Daniel,
Got a question concerning the code in
linux-nat.c::linux_handle_extended_wait.
You've got a PTRACE_EVENT_FORK event, and now you're going to call
waitpid. You pull a pid out of a list of stopped pids, and wait for
it using waitpid. In your comment, you explain that you don't have to
worry about the pid being a clone, because you didn't ask for pids in
the event mask.
But how is this affected by threads, especially NPTL threads?
I've got a fairly simple test-case (modified from pthreads.c,
I'll attach it), in which a child thread calls fork -- but gdb
apparently tries to wait on the main thread (or perhaps the most
recent event thread). Since that's not the thread that called
fork, waitpid returns -1 with "no child". Gdb reports:
waiting for new child: No child processes.
FWIW, I've tried this on both a single-processor and an SMP machine.
Michael
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Daniel, thread vs. fork question.
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:09:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <404FBC18.4090909@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20040319000900.q9cWEyPSwaRB1Cj9pQv62ptmcqjovlGD3KL31dmDTfc@z> (raw)
Hey Daniel,
Got a question concerning the code in
linux-nat.c::linux_handle_extended_wait.
You've got a PTRACE_EVENT_FORK event, and now you're going to call
waitpid. You pull a pid out of a list of stopped pids, and wait for
it using waitpid. In your comment, you explain that you don't have to
worry about the pid being a clone, because you didn't ask for pids in
the event mask.
But how is this affected by threads, especially NPTL threads?
I've got a fairly simple test-case (modified from pthreads.c,
I'll attach it), in which a child thread calls fork -- but gdb
apparently tries to wait on the main thread (or perhaps the most
recent event thread). Since that's not the thread that called
fork, waitpid returns -1 with "no child". Gdb reports:
waiting for new child: No child processes.
FWIW, I've tried this on both a single-processor and an SMP machine.
Michael
next reply other threads:[~2004-03-11 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-11 1:08 Michael Snyder [this message]
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-11 1:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Michael Snyder
2004-03-11 2:22 ` Michael Snyder
2004-03-19 19:29 ` Michael Snyder
2004-03-19 19:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Michael Snyder
2004-03-22 17:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-22 20:20 ` [patch] Fix threads vs. fork following Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-23 20:17 ` Michael Snyder
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=404FBC18.4090909@redhat.com \
--to=msnyder@redhat.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.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