Re: [PATCH 8/8] gdb: resume ongoing step after handling fork or vfork

[Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>]

[Lol, I reviewed this one twice, and the first time forgot to press send.]

This is OK.  Small nits in the testcase below.

On 2022-01-17 16:27, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:

> +#include <pthread.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +#include <sys/types.h>
> +#include <sys/wait.h>
> +#include <errno.h>
> +#include <assert.h>
> +#include <limits.h>
> +
> +/* Number of threads doing forks.  */
> +#define N_FORKERS 4
> +
> +static void *
> +forker (void *arg)
> +{
> +  for (;;)
> +    {
> +      pid_t pid = FORK_FUNC ();
> +
> +      if (pid == 0)
> +	_exit(11);

Missing space before parens.

> +
> +      assert (pid > 0);
> +
> +      /* Wait for children to exit.  */
> +      int ret;
> +      int stat;
> +      do {

{ on the next line.  Thus:

> +        ret = waitpid (pid, &stat, 0);
> +      } while (ret == EINTR);
> +
> +      assert (ret == pid);
> +      assert (WIFEXITED (stat));
> +      assert (WEXITSTATUS (stat) == 11);
> +
> +      usleep (40 * 1000);

Why not sleep_a_bit()?  Is the fact that it's a little less time significant?

> +    }
> +
> +  return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static void
> +sleep_a_bit (void)
> +{
> +  usleep (1000 * 50);
> +}
> +
> +int
> +main (void)
> +{
> +  alarm (60);
> +
> +  pthread_t thread[N_FORKERS];
> +  for (int i = 0; i < N_FORKERS; ++i)

Declare "int i" outside the loop so this compiles as C90 as well.  Ditto below.

> +    {
> +      int ret = pthread_create (&thread[i], NULL, forker, NULL);
> +      assert (ret == 0);
> +    }
> +
> +  for (int i = 0; i < INT_MAX; ++i) /* for loop */
> +    {
> +      sleep_a_bit ();  /* break here */
> +      sleep_a_bit ();  /* other line */
> +    }
> +
> +  for (int i = 0; i < N_FORKERS; ++i)
> +    pthread_join (thread[i], NULL);
> +
> +  return 0;
> +}