Re: About handle_inferior_event new_thread_event

Pedro Alves
2009-06-29T18:45:27Z

On Monday 29 June 2009 18:56:28, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> I don't know - but I do know that this code has never worked reliably
> for Linux; we used to get crashes or internal errors from unset
> LWP-private state any time we went through here.  I'd rather all
> targets were required to do thread accounting on their own.

Yeah, although I don't think those should be happening currently.
linux-nat.c just ignores events from lwps not in the lwp_list... In non-stop
mode, it's already an internal error to reach this bit. I do
notice that nto-procfs.c is one target that defers adding threads to the
list to handle_inferior_event ... but I honestly doubt the new thread
needs a first-chance resume.

--
Pedro Alves