From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10870 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2014 20:52:44 -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 10745 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jul 2014 20:52:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.63) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:52:42 +0000 Received: from [68.104.16.238] (helo=macbook2.local) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1X79iC-0003iI-Et for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:52:32 -0400 Message-ID: <53C5948B.9000102@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 21:03:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Linux: Use kill_lwp/tkill instead of kill when killing a, process References: <53C54C7C.3070907@redhat.com> <20140715192749.GA32218@host2.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20140715192749.GA32218@host2.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: ae6f8838ff913eba0cc1426638a40ef67e972de0d01da9402fe4fadd6958aba74b9905801215f520350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-07/txt/msg00406.txt.bz2 On 7/15/14, 12:27 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 17:45:00 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Another thing I noticed by inspection while fixing the >> recent gdbserver kill crash. >> >> Anyone know a reason we use plain "kill" here, instead >> of tkill like everywhere else? > > I do not. Heh, since it ultimately stems from a patch you did for Archer: https://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2011-q1/msg00102.html But going by context, maybe kill_lwp was just overlooked at the time, and then propagated verbatim thereafter. Stan stan@codesourcery.com