From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id WIsxNXpSLWQXyyMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 06:50:34 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id CE65B1E15D; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 06:50:34 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=GLeOSYnF; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83B431E0D2 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 06:50:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E85B3858C31 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 10:50:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 0E85B3858C31 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1680691834; bh=Jq3NLw7MeoGulL8vXicCx0/8zNMtwgYIZiTe3M3mCVU=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=GLeOSYnFz+NK++VWl4WnVEwvEl89HpzSOYPjUZop8A+PlETmHW7hTEbbkHkuSGPSV tN8J8Gs/2WihWPWngqceu3KG6xLdwN0tVRMCqYhs7rAKXZozqSSc0I5B/OGrlWr2Nr UC+krZpviooVr11miaTP1p70wwknWDa1H+rhKGQg= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D73D93858D20 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2023 10:50:14 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org D73D93858D20 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pk0iQ-0000Jy-Hy; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 06:50:10 -0400 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pk0iP-0007vh-Ux; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 06:50:10 -0400 Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2023 13:50:36 +0300 Message-Id: <83edoysiv7.fsf@gnu.org> To: "Aktemur, Tankut Baris" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gdb: add a '-stopped' option to "info threads" References: <83ileasl6h.fsf@gnu.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: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > From: "Aktemur, Tankut Baris" > Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 10:19:26 +0000 > > I'm fine if we make the single thread id a special case. Maybe that's all we should do. > But then the question is, where do we draw the line? If the user > gave just a few thread ids, do we still ignore the flag? What is > the limit to the acceptable list length? Because of these > questions, consistently applying the flag made more sense to me. We don't have to be 100% consistent, we just need to be useful.