From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-78679-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 28704 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2011 11:12:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 28694 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Feb 2011 11:12:30 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TW_WT
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 11:12:25 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LH600E006GV9A00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:12:22 +0200 (IST)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.53.157]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LH600EEN74HCB00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:12:19 +0200 (IST)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 11:27:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] document the new VxWorks port
In-reply-to: <20110225102624.GB3211@adacore.com>
To: Jerome Guitton <guitton@adacore.com>
Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83ipw8qsfe.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <1298569763-18784-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <1298569763-18784-19-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <838vx5rzf8.fsf@gnu.org> <20110225102624.GB3211@adacore.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00746.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 11:26:24 +0100
> From: Jerome Guitton <guitton@adacore.com>
> Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> 
> Thank you for your review. I'll let Joel give a complete response;
> I'll just answer one of your questions:
> 
> > > +@kindex info wtx threads
> > > +@item info wtx threads
> > 
> > Why a separate command?  Isn't it possible to use "info threads"?
> 
> "info threads" lists only the threads of the inferior, whereas
> "info wtx threads" lists all threads on target.

Since there's no "inferior" on this target, is it so bad to show all
the threads?

And what does "info threads" do on that target?

> The reason why it is not called, say, "info wtx processes", is a
> particularity of VxWorks: most applications actually run on kernel
> space, and share the same memory area. So they are really threads, not
> processes.

That's fine, but then why not treat them as threads?