From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 245C73857812 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 15:52:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 245C73857812 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [172.16.0.95] (192-222-181-218.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.181.218]) (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 92E0D1E50D; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 11:52:14 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: don't use inferior_ptid in linux_nat_wait_1 To: Tom Tromey , Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Cc: Simon Marchi References: <20200801222432.7404-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <87lfiuthhp.fsf@tromey.com> <53d4c32b-749e-88f4-53fd-03e61f007125@simark.ca> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 11:52:13 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <53d4c32b-749e-88f4-53fd-03e61f007125@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: tl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 15:52:16 -0000 On 2020-08-04 2:49 p.m., Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2020-08-04 2:04 p.m., Tom Tromey wrote: >> Simon> gdb/ChangeLog: >> >> Simon> * linux-nat.c (linux_nat_wait_1): Don't use inferior_ptid when >> Simon> checking for initial lwp. >> >> This seems fine to me. >> Thanks. > > Thanks for checking. I'll wait to see if Pedro has an opinion about this, just > in case. > > Simon > I pushed this patch. Simon