Re: [rfa] Include the LWP in thread-db's PTIDs

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 05:36:30PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
>>At one time, I believe that thread-db.c was planned to support the full
>>range of features supported by the libthread_db interface, presumably as
>>defined by Sun's implementation.  That never panned out, and while non-1:1
>>support did work at one point, I don't think it has in a long while.  If it
>>was wanted, I wouldn't re-implement it the same way.  So this patch begins
>>the process of removing unneeded generality from thread-db.  In particular,
>>while thread-db will still compute the TID, the mapping of threads to LWPs
>>will be considered fixed.
>>
>>My goal is to have a GNU/Linux target vector, whose entry points call into
>>thread-db when necessary, instead of having a thread-db wrapper around all
>>the GNU/Linux methods.  One of the things this will fix is the need for two
>>separate versions of the GNU/Linux native wait() code - we will always use
>>the multi-threaded-aware version.  Another thing it will fix is a bug in the
>>fork-following code which tries to find the LWP from a thread ID.
>>
>>This patch tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu using NPTL; no regressions. OK?
> 
> 
> Here's the patch, updated to apply to linux-thread-db.c instead.  Still
> no regressions; Mark indicated that the 1:1 assumption seemed reasonable
> once the file was marked as Linux-specific.
> 
> Michael, OK to commit?

Hey, sorry for losing this thread.  Yes, this is OK to commit.