Re: [PATCH 1/3] Pass inferior to terminal_save_inferior

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>]

On 2018-10-22 16:54, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 10/16/2018 04:38 AM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>> Instead of relying on the current inferior, pass an inferior pointer 
>> to
>> the target implementing terminal_save_inferior.  There should be no
>> change in behavior.
>> 
> 
> Your original patch 3/3 ended up not using the inferior pointer.  :-)
> 
> I suppose that this doesn't hurt, like the equivalent target_detach
> change.

Well, the original 3/3 patch doesn't change the implementation of 
terminal_save_inferior, it changes the inferior_exit observer, so it's 
not really related to this change.

>> I added documentation to terminal_save_inferior, as I understand it
>> (maybe I understood it wrong, so please take a look).
> 
> That looks good.  (please recall to update commit log.)
> 
>> diff --git a/gdb/target.c b/gdb/target.c
>> index 2d98954b54ac..93d16b90f179 100644
>> --- a/gdb/target.c
>> +++ b/gdb/target.c
>> @@ -511,10 +511,7 @@ target_terminal_is_ours_kind 
>> (target_terminal_state desired_state)
>>    ALL_INFERIORS (inf)
>>      {
>>        if (inf->terminal_state == target_terminal_state::is_inferior)
>> -	{
>> -	  set_current_inferior (inf);
>> -	  current_top_target ()->terminal_save_inferior ();
>> -	}
>> +	current_top_target ()->terminal_save_inferior (inf);
>>      }
> With multi-target, current_top_target() will depend on
> the current inferior, so I'll need to put that
> set_current_inferior call back.

Can't you access the inferior's target stack directly instead of 
changing the current inferior?

Simon