From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25164 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2002 20:55:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25157 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2002 20:55:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zwingli.cygnus.com) (208.245.165.35) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2002 20:55:20 -0000 Received: by zwingli.cygnus.com (Postfix, from userid 442) id A14B45EA11; Wed, 31 Jul 2002 15:55:17 -0500 (EST) To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: gdb/568, messy thread exits References: <20020731163910.GA5622@nevyn.them.org> <20020731202940.GA16310@nevyn.them.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 14:01:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20020731202940.GA16310@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00633.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > Here's the interesting part. It occurs whenever thread_db can not look > up the LWP<->Thread mapping in the child. If, for instance, the child > has disappeared, we can not look up its mapping any more. Or if some > other circumstance causes the mapping to be unavailable, like an > exec(); there's another PR about that case. I dunno. I mean, if someone asks you to look up a TID's LWP, and you can't, that seems like an error, no? Isn't it supposed to be better to flag errors early than let the thing go crashing on through the forest with bogus information? I'm glad you found a patch that addresses the PR I filed, but there's no way I can approve this patch --- not because I'm sure it's wrong, but because I'm sure I have no idea whether it's right or wrong. :) > Of course, it is also my opinion that we perform the mapping a stupid > number of times. ``set debug target 1'' and run a threaded program; > you'll see it happen over and over again. Yes, I noticed this: amazing numbers of huge memory transfers. Yuck.