From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 86834 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2015 15:58:54 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 86824 invoked by uid 89); 14 Mar 2015 15:58:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 15:58:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B5C18E674; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 15:58:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t2EFwnvV000724; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 11:58:50 -0400 Message-ID: <55045AB9.2000408@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 15:58:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Inadvertently run inferior threads References: <83h9tq3zu3.fsf@gnu.org> <55043A63.6020103@redhat.com> <8361a339xd.fsf@gnu.org> <5504555C.804@redhat.com> <550458E0.10206@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <550458E0.10206@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 On 03/14/2015 03:50 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> Calling a function that ends up starting new threads should >> work OK, but indeed that seems to be broken... >> >> On GNU/Linux, and a trivial program with: >> >> ~~~ >> void >> start_thread (void) >> { >> pthread_t thread; >> >> pthread_create (&thread, NULL, thread_function, NULL); >> } >> ~~~ >> >> results in: >> >> (gdb) p start_thread () >> [New Thread 0x7ffff7fc1700 (LWP 9903)] >> $1 = void >> (gdb) info threads >> Id Target Id Frame >> 2 Thread 0x7ffff7fc1700 (LWP 9903) "start-thread-in" (running) >> * 1 Thread 0x7ffff7fc2740 (LWP 9899) "start-thread-in" main () at start-thread-infcall.c:35 >> > > I see what's going on here: > > #1 - we suppress the *stopped -> *running transitions/notification when > doing an inferior function call (the in_infcall checks in infrun.c). > > #2 - new threads are spawned and given *running state, because well, > they're running. > > #3 - we suppress the running -> *stopped transition when doing > an infcall, like in #1. (The in_infcall check in normal_stop). > > #4 - result: _new_ threads end up in "running" state, even though they > are stopped. > > I don't know off hand what the best fix is. This is now: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18127 Thanks, Pedro Alves