From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 56561 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2017 11:54:02 -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 56538 invoked by uid 89); 19 Jan 2017 11:54:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= 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; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:54:00 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AE0176EC; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v0JBrwH2009601; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:53:59 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR threads/20743: Don't attempt to suspend or resume exited threads. To: John Baldwin , Luis Machado References: <20161223212842.42715-1-jhb@FreeBSD.org> <1723055.CyypAqrLYR@ralph.baldwin.cx> <75fc00ff-6472-d5aa-9f74-3495bcf7fb83@codesourcery.com> <4617495.WEzsQTeE5q@ralph.baldwin.cx> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, vd@freebsd.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <4fb964cd-da8a-f4c1-856d-e347493fe260@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4617495.WEzsQTeE5q@ralph.baldwin.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00375.txt.bz2 On 01/13/2017 01:44 AM, John Baldwin wrote: >> So i take it using ALL_NON_EXITED_THREADS is something that would seem >> reasonable to use in this case and not iterate through all threads (even >> ones marked exitting)? > > Yes, that would work for me. > Agree, that should be fine. Thanks, Pedro Alves