From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7020 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2008 21:03:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 7011 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jul 2008 21:03:34 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:03:15 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0EC998415; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:03:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66399810F; Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:03:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KGgoi-0004qs-0i; Wed, 09 Jul 2008 17:03:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI threads behaviour Message-ID: <20080709210311.GA18103@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200806181601.52404.vladimir@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200806181601.52404.vladimir@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-07/txt/msg00060.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 04:01:52PM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > The CLI behaviour of setting GDB current thread to invalid value if the > current thread exits will be preserved, but is of limited value, since > the frontend does not depend on current thread directly, and will be notified > about thread exit anyway. Therefore, no notification will be emitted in > this case. What about in all-stop mode, where the CLI behavior is to change to a new event thread? > The notification will be emitted even if the thread user requested to be > selected is the same as currently selected thread. Imagine the frontend > has two windows open -- in one, UI has thread 1 selected, and in another, > UI has thread 2 selected. If user types "thread 2" in GDB console in the > first window, would expect the first window UI to switch to thread 2. So, > the notification should be emitted even if GDB current thread is 2, > already. I don't understand the need for this. If you're going to let the user type a CLI command, then before you can do that you have to make sure GDB and the UI are synchronized on the current thread/frame. Otherwise "backtrace" or "thread" won't work. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery