From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14354 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2004 22:51:53 -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 14346 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2004 22:51:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 13 Sep 2004 22:51:52 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8DMpkur017755 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:51:51 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8DMpe723311; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:51:40 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (dhcp-172-16-25-160.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.25.160]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8DMpdV24613; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:51:40 -0700 Message-ID: <4146247B.20600@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:51:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; es-ES; rv:1.4.2) Gecko/20040301 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] Assume thread-db loaded over a live process References: <4145A745.6090603@gnu.org> <4145EA88.2050401@redhat.com> <414615E4.8030003@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <414615E4.8030003@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00220.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: >> Andrew Cagney wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> This patch changes: >>> >>> - /* We can only poke around if there actually is a child process. >>> - If there is no child process alive, postpone the steps below >>> - until one has been created. */ >>> - if (proc_handle.pid != 0) >>> - { >>> - enable_thread_event_reporting (); >>> - thread_db_find_new_threads (); >>> - } >>> + enable_thread_event_reporting (); >>> + thread_db_find_new_threads (); >>> >>> this code is only executed when there is a child process so the guard >>> isn't needed. Tested on GNU/Linux, no change in test results. >>> >>> ok? >> >> >> >> From memory, I think this code was to guard against the corefile case. >> When you load a corefile, you may call thread_db_new_objfile, but >> you won't have a child process. Is that no longer the case? Does >> loading a corefile no longer cause this function to be called? > > > This code is only executed when there is a child process. As you note, > when loading a core file there is no child process (and as daniel > pointed out, !target_has_execution holds) so this code is not executed. That's what I don't understand, Andrew. This code *used to* get called for a corefile. What's changed? As far as I can see, it will get called from symbol_file_add. In my existing July build, it does.