From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 480E63851C2A for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 18:49:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 480E63851C2A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (173-246-6-90.qc.cable.ebox.net [173.246.6.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E81551E554; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:49:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: don't use inferior_ptid in linux_nat_wait_1 To: Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Cc: Simon Marchi References: <20200801222432.7404-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <87lfiuthhp.fsf@tromey.com> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <53d4c32b-749e-88f4-53fd-03e61f007125@simark.ca> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:49:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87lfiuthhp.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 18:49:30 -0000 On 2020-08-04 2:04 p.m., Tom Tromey wrote: > Simon> gdb/ChangeLog: > > Simon> * linux-nat.c (linux_nat_wait_1): Don't use inferior_ptid when > Simon> checking for initial lwp. > > This seems fine to me. > Thanks. Thanks for checking. I'll wait to see if Pedro has an opinion about this, just in case. Simon