From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id tk2SLOjs3WJQ/hkAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:07:52 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id A2B4D1E5EA; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:07:52 -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=Jb4BXW1M; 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,NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 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 423E91E21F for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:07:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DDA385274E for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 01:07:51 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D8DDA385274E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1658711271; bh=FsIrCuPeo4w4R/stAPBOOqkD3esqYsLoCnXVv7zyv0c=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=Jb4BXW1M6iUbdxRfF99lc8n12rC4pHXSdcJ/7B9ObH3XrpkTPCF3e5rBJ/9+6ufux nv0GrzenFopTlAktmdCZ1PnRXOc4x3EjvvvYoAbj/DpMOLyhKjwnyMiWhEf5iYAu2S RRDfcDCsJukCd3gwvzyeBi3EcGSNtxJpZqouzxig= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D027385842E for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2022 01:07:33 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 0D027385842E 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 8AB1D1E21F; Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:07:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 21:07:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a timeout parameter to gdb_do_one_event Content-Language: en-US To: Patrick Monnerat , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20220317130846.162955-1-patrick@monnerat.net> <578979e9-353c-fd92-853a-b78af2afd8ad@simark.ca> <8b9d291b-c05f-52de-dd34-a644102a9aae@monnerat.net> In-Reply-To: <8b9d291b-c05f-52de-dd34-a644102a9aae@monnerat.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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" On 2022-07-22 18:45, Patrick Monnerat wrote: > > On 7/22/22 15:41, Simon Marchi wrote: >> >> On 2022-03-17 09:08, Patrick Monnerat via Gdb-patches wrote: >>> Since commit b2d8657, having a per-interpreter event/command loop is not >>> possible anymore. >>> >>> As Insight uses a GUI that has its own event loop, gdb and GUI event >>> loops have then to be "merged" (i.e.: work together). But this is >>> problematic as gdb_do_one_event is not aware of this alternate event >>> loop and thus may wait forever. >>> >>> The solution is to implement a wait timeout to gdb_do_one_event. This >>> cannot be done externally as gdb timers are event sources themselves. >>> >>> The new parameter defaults to "no timeout": as it is used by Insight >>> only, there is no need to update calls from the gdb source tree. > Hi Simon, >> Sorry for the delay. > Never mind! >> The patch is fine with me. Pedro and Tom also >> took a look at previous iterations and I didn't see any disagreement >> either. > Thanks to you and mates for these reviews and advice. >> I don't remember, do you have push access? Otherwise I can >> push it for you. > > No, I haven't. That's why I'm pinging many times! > > Thanks in advance for commit. > > BTW: would it be possible to get push access ? How ? I still have some patches (all related to insight) to submit and want to speed up a bit the process (without skipping this list, of course!) and discharge you from this task. Totally, fill the form here: https://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/pdw/ps_form.cgi You can put me as the referrer. Once you have your push access, you can push a patch adding yourself to gdb/MAINTAINERS. See the git history of that file for examples. You can then push the patch in this thread. Simon