From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31430 invoked by alias); 1 May 2008 16:38:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 31418 invoked by uid 22791); 1 May 2008 16:38:00 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 May 2008 16:37:40 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jrbmr-0007wH-2z for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Thu, 01 May 2008 16:37:37 +0000 Received: from 78.158.192.230 ([78.158.192.230]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 01 May 2008 16:37:37 +0000 Received: from vladimir by 78.158.192.230 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 01 May 2008 16:37:37 +0000 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: MI non-stop interface details Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 16:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <200804261939.37635.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200804291848.51730.pedro@codesourcery.com> <481762E8.5010707@windriver.com> <200805012015.38035.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <4819F019.3030402@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.5 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 Pawel Piech wrote: > Vladimir Prus wrote: >> On Tuesday 29 April 2008 22:03:20 Pawel Piech wrote: >> >>> Pedro Alves wrote: >>> >>>> I can't see how is it different -- in the frontend's perspective -- >>>> of keeping track of what to pass to --thread= *provided GDB doesn't switch >>>> threads automatically*. But then again, I'm no frontend writer. >>>> >>>> >>> Using -thread-select makes it easier for the front end to be compatible >>> with older versions of GDB. >>> >> >> Hmm, I though that only reason that -thread-select is simpler is because >> in DSF, specifically, there's no central place where commands are send >> and where --thread can be conveniently added. I'm not saying this is good, >> or bad, but this is not the case for all frontend. Am I wrong? >> >> - Volodya >> > In DSF-GDB there _is_ a central place where commands are sent, this is > where the protocol state is adjusted using -thread-select. However, the > --thread option is being added to many but not all commands, so the same > mechanism that adds the -thread-select could not be reused to add > --thread option. Instead each command which accepts --thread that would > need to be adjusted to use the --thread, but only when in non-stop > debugging mode. This is not actually. The plan is for eery command will accept --thread. Those that don't have any use of it will ignore it. The only command, at the moment, for which the meaning of --thread is not yet clear, and for which the frontend might have to have custom decision logic, is --exec-continue. - Volodya