From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15361 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2015 13:08:02 -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 15304 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jun 2015 13:08:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no 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; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:08:00 +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 54845AC7C0; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:07:59 +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 t5FD7vX8006932; Mon, 15 Jun 2015 09:07:58 -0400 Message-ID: <557ECE2D.1000707@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 13:08:00 -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> <83616vtx40.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83616vtx40.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 On 06/10/2015 04:13 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 16:55:58 +0200 >> From: Eli Zaretskii >> Cc: gdb@sourceware.org >> >>> Otherwise, "(gdb) interrupt" would probably work. >> >> Thanks, I will try using this next time. > > It seems like 'interrupt' does nothing in native debugging of a target > that doesn't support async execution, at least on MS-Windows. Is that > a bug, or is it expected? It's old code, but I think the idea of the target_can_async check in interrupt_command is "this shouldn't even be possible". If the target doesn't support async execution, you're not supposed to be able to end up with a prompt while the target is running in the first place. Thanks, Pedro Alves