From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id qnFHCkX78GI4vSIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 08:02:13 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2193E1EA06; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 08:02:13 -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=b2kVu2Rt; 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=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.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 CD4861E9ED for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 08:02:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E7BC385AC3C for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:02:12 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7E7BC385AC3C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1659960132; bh=E5u0TQj6VsGsSXPazlbXWTkR2J0zmp+Gs9jJ1Ogp1MU=; h=To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=b2kVu2RtMEq36aLsVfw2pFrAp9tXa99KbA44Rp52X8B8JFpdAYaiYw0Thg8GFk30Q e8ezdobIkgcRccVqub7azVkVgHgNi0GhUx84Y5bCx1bDQdiXbJWGgY80nzST9Zu5BN ArLRGkgRqKZEBKeqzwm3n7Mydt+Sn5teLUUsFpXM= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 577BA38582BF for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:01:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 577BA38582BF Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-47-hlwtmhs9PeOVRka8Ope2BQ-1; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 08:01:49 -0400 X-MC-Unique: hlwtmhs9PeOVRka8Ope2BQ-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id d6-20020adfa346000000b002206e4c29caso1359749wrb.8 for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 05:01:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=E5u0TQj6VsGsSXPazlbXWTkR2J0zmp+Gs9jJ1Ogp1MU=; b=TC1fTJ9DfyXJomzn/aUTJJiHerca1jFr+j+1qzPMBjPz7AHs/MWPIA8eyS9kN67yt1 lYelPTQIo4J8MT6x2U1O4xt1bumDNcqqMvntiXuLFGD0TW3CtSXm73bjLULCFrgKe/QT Yn8YnAL/Mip7/4PleSpSBH6QxT6oAv3IxFMgQzV16ey/CwU8GfRiEWxIhAX663DYOnYZ O+x1PmU/3OGHNXmgnfMtUOC9uFELsbfeQRcdDMGwko7dlAPbhd4cDu5WL/C8fAYrdMVq iiBuBTA8P4264yclvvhx1Cd2WrY4hxvd66cxiXl8/l4ePgCTOdIea+cFIZy+psF2LMKr iIDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0rHNi9yJ2A6D8+l81BGjzxx3hmXSqEt1AETN1jyYmNzDhAoW0+ h2SDI65kM0jbmuFwvpyCsZ48X+4l/vE8sZOJQygzfJkonpmHPUiaQ8VG89Zr5q8QypAHKd/Aq84 m5/ZSeII45c3c/0h3TM5uiw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:509:b0:3a5:2c2:fb40 with SMTP id i9-20020a05600c050900b003a502c2fb40mr15717305wmc.163.1659960108398; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 05:01:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR5qdF9LblnsJNI8OOXrB+5h0DdsE3DSoAc3AnALMetZ1oyplYKyhmePJFIl9wXUKtQn/vnOYQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:509:b0:3a5:2c2:fb40 with SMTP id i9-20020a05600c050900b003a502c2fb40mr15717289wmc.163.1659960108095; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 05:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (15.72.115.87.dyn.plus.net. [87.115.72.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q3-20020a056000136300b0021b956da1dcsm11084464wrz.113.2022.08.08.05.01.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 08 Aug 2022 05:01:47 -0700 (PDT) To: Craig Blackmore , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 0/2] Make thread_info executing and resumed state more consistent In-Reply-To: <3480a85f-09e5-8c24-826c-a3fd563a013c@embecosm.com> References: <20220113183406.3577620-1-aburgess@redhat.com> <3480a85f-09e5-8c24-826c-a3fd563a013c@embecosm.com> Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2022 13:01:46 +0100 Message-ID: <87fsi70wr9.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain 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: Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Andrew Burgess Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Craig Blackmore writes: > On 21/04/2022 17:45, Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches wrote: >> And I'm back on this patch again! >> >> I've rebased this onto current master and done some testing. I >> haven't found any regressions, but as I've said before, this change >> touches every target, and my testing on anything other than GNU/Linux >> (x86-64) is pretty thin, so I'm fully expecting this to introduce some >> issues - these issues _should_ be limited to assertion failures when >> threads are not in the expected states, I would hope there's no >> crashes being introduced. >> >> There's been no significant changes since v3. I have split out a >> little bit of the debug printing code (the new #1 patch), but the >> second patch is pretty much the same as v3. >> >> V3 was given a cautious OK, but I wanted to advertise this patch again >> in case anyone wants to object before I merge this. > > Hi Andrew, > > Do you still intend to merge the second patch in this series? I do intend to return to this work, but I have another patch that I need to get finished first before I'll have any free time to look at this. When I do go back to this work I'm tempted to start fresh. I was always a little unsure about all the changes to the new thread creation code (setting the resumed/executing flags in new threads), and I'm hoping that if I start fresh then I might be able to come up with something that feels a little cleaner. That said, I'd certainly be supportive if anyone wanted to take this patch on and move it forward. Thanks, Andrew