From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7118 invoked by alias); 22 May 2013 14:47:52 -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 7103 invoked by uid 89); 22 May 2013 14:47:52 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 May 2013 14:47:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r4MEln1Y030442 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 22 May 2013 10:47:49 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-72.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.72]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4MElls3014496 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 22 May 2013 10:47:48 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: David Taylor Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: add-inferior / clone-inferior References: <7249.1369061005@usendtaylorx2l> <87bo84l5ad.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 14:47:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87bo84l5ad.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Tue, 21 May 2013 09:30:02 -0600") Message-ID: <87ehczhy0c.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-05/txt/msg00098.txt.bz2 Tom> The whole target stack needs to be switched out depending on which Tom> target is "active". I guess one idea would be to make it depend on the Tom> current inferior. But then I would worry whether the correct inferior Tom> is always selected when gdb is doing various operations. Thinking about it some more, it may be simpler to associate the target stack with a program space, not an inferior. This will have the same effect, but I think gdb is generally more careful about selecting a program space before doing an operation. E.g., linespec already does this properly, breakpoints already do this properly, etc. Tom> I wonder if there are other UI issues to consider. One that comes to mind is what target is associated with an inferior created with add-inferior? How could you change this inferior's target to connect it to some existing target? Also, some way to see the active targets would be needed. "info target" already seems to be taken. Tom