From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30438 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2013 14:37:21 -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 30428 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2013 14:37:20 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:37:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3TEb8TK006096 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:37:08 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3TEb7VW029887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:37:07 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Thread exit messages on MS-Windows References: <83obd1tyi7.fsf@gnu.org> <838v44tnf8.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 19:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <838v44tnf8.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 27 Apr 2013 10:58:35 +0300") Message-ID: <87li817699.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00869.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: >> In thread.c, I see that add_thread_with_info will announce new threads >> if print_thread_events is non-zero, but I see no similar announcement >> in delete_thread or its subroutines. Is this supposed to be handled >> by target-specific back ends? I see something like that in, e.g., >> linux-nat.c and in inf-ttrace.c, but I'm unsure whether that is a >> conclusive evidence. >> >> If indeed thread deletion should be announced by the target, why this >> asymmetry with thread creation? Eli> No one replied, so I'm now converting this into an RFA. The patch Eli> below causes GDB on Windows to display thread exit messages like this: I didn't answer, but I also wonder why it is not done by delete_thread. Tom