From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19330 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2009 00:24:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 19321 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2009 00:24:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:24:25 +0000 Received: from zps77.corp.google.com (zps77.corp.google.com [172.25.146.77]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n060ONDt020073 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:24:23 -0800 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rvbk29.prod.google.com [10.140.87.29]) by zps77.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n060OK9r030198 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:24:20 -0800 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id k29so8833546rvb.0 for ; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:24:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.208.17 with SMTP id f17mr10619953rvg.261.1231201460418; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:24:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20081218192447.GA29775@caradoc.them.org> References: <20081213213041.D19D51C7A0F@localhost> <20081218192447.GA29775@caradoc.them.org> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:24:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA] Improve comment in linux-low.c:handle_extended_wait From: Doug Evans To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Michael Snyder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 01:30:41PM -0800, Doug Evans wrote: >> Hi. >> >> This is a minor cleanup to a comment. >> What "it" is isn't clear. >> >> Ok to check in? > > Actually, I meant "be sure not to lose the other signal". We > previously would just stop and think we'd gotten the SIGSTOP. > But your version is equally valid. I checked in this version. 2008-12-13 Doug Evans * linux-low.c (handle_extended_wait): Improve comment. Index: linux-low.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c,v retrieving revision 1.87 diff -u -p -r1.87 linux-low.c --- linux-low.c 5 Jan 2009 23:11:48 -0000 1.87 +++ linux-low.c 6 Jan 2009 00:14:03 -0000 @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ handle_extended_wait (struct process_inf /* Normally we will get the pending SIGSTOP. But in some cases we might get another signal delivered to the group first. - If we do, be sure not to lose it. */ + If we do get another signal, be sure not to lose it. */ if (WSTOPSIG (status) == SIGSTOP) { if (stopping_threads)