From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id uFBnISHC7GDNeAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:49 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 865C41EDEC; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 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 C37951E54D for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C471388A03C for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:28:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7C471388A03C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1626128928; bh=jUtUyhyLMgSBIjQBz+4dcblX4wLulsrIAPZuK76oCGM=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=mWWxyo++Hx7nKj3rMonWu6T0DD4NeGzrqNW7pCccAoBsBDOBOhxwzJLhNAAQYj7AA KmAELnTZARe8wPKK35/wmjkRCdIDlkKUlmKD2ofXcYevh92WPVztReWMsJyQhMR4i6 AMdDFqVwCWs/ksivggRV0d8anQM/7WJSEb4Cn988= Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30B4B385503E for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:28:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 30B4B385503E Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 16CMSMTn004605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:26 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 16CMSMTn004605 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E4BCB1E54D; Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] gdb: maintain per-process-target list of resumed threads with pending wait status To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20210622165704.2404007-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <20210622165704.2404007-8-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <52c8488e-fef2-a1fe-d150-50d510bedbe1@palves.net> <252f2a84-c7b4-d07a-fecc-c57685a89ee1@polymtl.ca> <25ce9332-1145-6cfa-1520-540fe17debd6@palves.net> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 18:28:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <25ce9332-1145-6cfa-1520-540fe17debd6@palves.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:28:22 +0000 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: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" >> Arggg, we don't want that. Since that is in a process_stratum_target >> method, I'll change the message to call the pid_to_str method of the >> current object instead: >> >> infrun_debug_printf ("removing from resumed threads with event list: %s", >> this->pid_to_str (thread->ptid).c_str ()); >> >> Does that sound good? > > It does not. That would mean a target higher on the stack wouldn't have a chance > at printing the thread. Since this is only for debug message purposes, and I find it clearer to see the spelled-out ptid anyway (the pid, lwp and tid values), I added a to_string method to ptid_t and used that here: std::string ptid_t::to_string () const { return string_printf ("%d.%d.%d", m_pid, m_lwp, m_tid); } >>>> + /* If we transition from not resumed to resumed, we might need to add >>>> + the thread to the resumed threads with pending statuses list. */ >>>> + if (resumed) >>>> + proc_target->maybe_add_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (this); >>> >>> Longest function name award goes to... ;-) >> >> Indeed! If you have a name that is shorter but just as clear, I'm open >> for suggestion. But I prefer names that are non-ambiguous and use the >> right terminology over names that are short just for convenience's sake. > > Sure, as a preference, though that shouldn't be a too-strict rule IMO, otherwise > with very long function names we can end up with awkward looking code as soon as we > need to indent a caller a couple levels. In this case, luckily that didn't happen, > so I'm not really objecting. > > "add_resumed_pending_status" or "add_resumed_pending_ws" would work as well for > me, for example. Ah you see, when I haven't touched some GDB code for a while, I would see "ws" and wonder what that is again... is GDB using websockets now ;) ? Simon