From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15441 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2009 18:29:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 15428 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Apr 2009 18:29:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:29:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3KIRRuF022898; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:27:27 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3KIRQN6026413; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:27:26 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-12-214.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.214]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3KIRPhk008538; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:27:26 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5591D37829A; Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:27:25 -0600 (MDT) To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Add base linux native multi-process support. References: <200904072056.04727.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200904201906.41719.pedro@codesourcery.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: Tom Tromey Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:29:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200904201906.41719.pedro@codesourcery.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Mon\, 20 Apr 2009 19\:06\:41 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00528.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Tom> After reading Paul's patch and then yours, it occurs to me that the Tom> thread database .so dlopen handle and various function pointers will Tom> have to be per-inferior. Pedro> Yeah. I was going to leave that for a follow up, but, his Pedro> patch looks close to go, so I'll rebase my patch when Paul's patch Pedro> goes in, and do that before reposting. Just to be clear, my comment was just an observation, not a request. This change will have to be done eventually, and if you are up for it, great... but I don't think it is a prerequisite for this patch. Tom