From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32010 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2010 23:50:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 32002 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2010 23:50:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 23:50:39 +0000 Received: from mailhost4.vmware.com (mailhost4.vmware.com [10.16.67.124]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D320D44004; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138]) by mailhost4.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA044C9A2D; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 16:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C0D85CB.3030009@vmware.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 23:50:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [RFA] fix crasher on detach command References: <4C0D3636.8040206@vmware.com> <4C0D41B4.3020008@vmware.com> <201006072008.51363.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201006072012.18043.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201006072012.18043.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00194.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 07 June 2010 20:08:51, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On Monday 07 June 2010 20:00:04, Michael Snyder wrote: >>>> Then we need to fix that, instead of adding workarounds in other >>>> areas. >>> I'm not sure how feasible that is. At this point I've had to use a >>> ^C^C to get out of a failing attach (target remote), and I'm hoping to >>> use the "detach" to cancel out any remaining inconsistent state. >>> The ^C^C handler can't necessarily do it by itself, 'cause from its >>> point of view, you don't really know what state you're in or what >>> state you want to be in. >> It's feasible. remote_open_1 + remote_start_remote and remote_close >> (usually from pop_target calls within remote.c) are all designed for >> this to not happen, but clearly there's a bug somewhere. It just >> sounds like there's something not exception safe that should be. > > To be a bit clearer -- > > you've said that the pid was left as 42000 (I assume you meant > inferior_ptid, but that find_inferior no longer finds that inferior. > Where is the current inferior getting it's pid cleared out? Why > aren't we clearing inferior_ptid as well? What do you mean by "the current inferior"? I thought that was inferior_ptid (which is "magic_null_ptid", (42000, 1, -1).