From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 116910 invoked by alias); 9 Feb 2017 17:53:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 116896 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2017 17:53:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=soooo, H*f:sk:0322ea0, H*f:sk:f20baf9, H*i:sk:f20baf9 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 17:53:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54513C01C10C; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:53:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v19HrHDB011560; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 12:53:18 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix usage of inferior_ptid in two thread_alive implementations To: Simon Marchi References: <20170207212450.2232-1-simon.marchi@ericsson.com> <0322ea0c-ce96-8b7c-5d2d-0efa87ab71ed@redhat.com> Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <8688edde-759a-7f84-482d-9823a8f546b3@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 17:53:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg00232.txt.bz2 On 02/09/2017 04:46 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2017-02-08 07:40, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 02/07/2017 09:24 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: >>> While inspecting some target code, I noticed that in these two >>> implementations of thread_alive, inferior_ptid is referenced directly >>> instead of using the ptid passed as parameters. I guess that it is >>> wrong, although I can't really test it in both cases. >> >> I can't test either, but it looks right to me. > > Soooo.. is this an approval :) ? OK by the end of the week to give a chance of area maintainers or interested folks to comment. E.g., Eli is the go32-nat.c maintainer and I don't mean to overstep, though that bit does look obvious to me. Mark or someone with BSD access could want to comment on the BSD bit. The latter you could perhaps test on the compile farm, if you have access. Thanks, Pedro Alves