From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8500 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2003 01:27:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8486 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2003 01:27:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 6 Mar 2003 01:27:36 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D14280001E; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 20:27:36 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E66A408.5020802@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 01:27:00 -0000 From: "J. Johnston" Organization: Red Hat Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gcore and nptl threads on linux References: <3E653983.8010005@redhat.com> <20030305005218.GA9222@nevyn.them.org> <3E662E68.7010205@redhat.com> <20030305172511.GB4425@nevyn.them.org> <3E669CA1.2010201@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: > >>> I would think the null_ptid would serve in such a case. >> >> >> >> I guess the issue is that we should be dumping the set of LWPs to the >> generated core file, not the set of threads. It seems to me like GDB >> should be aware of the list of LWPs, and it shouldn't be hidden in each >> individual thread package. > > > You mean add them to the `struct thread_info' list? Why not (ignoring > technical realities for the moment :-)? > How about a second list made up of thread_info structs for lwps? That way, the current thread routines wouldn't have to constantly validate whether the list item was a thread or lwp. This also would simplify the numbering system. There could be equivalent lwp routines for accessing the list (e.g. iterate_over_lwps() ). -- Jeff J.