From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5492 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2009 00:49:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 5482 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Oct 2009 00:49:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:49:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 31377 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2009 00:49:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 6 Oct 2009 00:49:23 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Potential problem between non-stop and linux-thread-db Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:49:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Michael Snyder References: <4ACA9270.3020205@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4ACA9270.3020205@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910060149.26230.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2009-10/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 06 October 2009 01:42:24, Michael Snyder wrote: > These were written under the "all-stop" convention, but the comments > are no longer true, is it not so? > > So, async/nonstop guys -- do we need to do anything about this? AFAIK, these callbacks weren't really used by glibc. Has that changed recently? -- Pedro Alves