From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2111 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2008 11:51:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 2072 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2008 11:51:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:51:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 32693 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2008 11:50:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 16 Jul 2008 11:50:59 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI threads behaviour Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:51:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <200806181601.52404.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080709210311.GA18103@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20080709210311.GA18103@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807161551.01112.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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/msg00185.txt.bz2 On Thursday 10 July 2008 01:03:11 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > 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? We're talking about thread exit here -- does CLI automatically switch to a non-dead thread when the current one exits? If so, then the notification would have to be emitted, too. > > > 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. What is "synchronized"? You don't need to emit -thread-select, since there's --thread, and what I mean is that if have a window where UI's selected thread is 1, and you type "thread 2" in console, and frontend sends -interpreter-exec --thread 1 "thread 2" then one should get =thread-selected,id="2" regardless of what inferior_ptid was immediately before this command is processed. - Volodya