From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118702 invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2018 14:51:31 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 118687 invoked by uid 89); 16 Oct 2018 14:51:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:667 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:51:29 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EC6588314; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0DD678439; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:51:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Release the GIL while running a gdb command or expression To: Tom Tromey References: <20181010202233.17985-1-tom@tromey.com> <6c7d1b6d-2d7a-dcaf-8d20-615bfb474af9@redhat.com> <871s8qcab9.fsf@tromey.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <4aa9c215-9b86-40f9-37e9-d96121e80736@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:51:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <871s8qcab9.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00346.txt.bz2 On 10/16/2018 02:04 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> AFAICT, "release_gil" was not included in this version of > Pedro> the patch, so that shouldn't be here either. > > Oops, forgot to remove that. > > Pedro> The test should be failing because of that, I believe, > Pedro> because GDB should be complaining that release_gil > Pedro> is an invalid keyword. Does the test somehow > Pedro> happen to still pass with that? > > Yeah, it did somehow. Hopefully it'll be possible to tighten the test a bit to avoid that. Thanks, Pedro Alves