This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Blech. Right list this time. On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 01:36:06PM -0700, Doug Evans wrote: >> Attached is a simplistic patch to help illustrate the challenge. >> >> Here is an example session that prints from/to and the thread number >> in "[New ...", "[Switching ...", etc. messages. >> I can think of two issues with the patch: >> 1) Printing "[tT]hread" twice in one line is a bit annoying. >> 2) Spreading from/to over two lines is a bit annoying. > > What do you think of this? ?On the theory that you can go look up > thread #2, either in 'info threads' or in a previous notification: > > [Switching from thread #2 to thread #3, Thread 0x41001960 (LWP 14407)] "works for me" > Or, migrating the "Thread" out: > > [Switching from thread #2 to thread #3, 0x41001960 (LWP 14407)] > > But that might be tricky with multi-process, some ptid_t's are not > threads. It's not clear how multi-process is going to work yet (or more likely I've forgotten). ?I played with attaching and running several processes via gdbserver and all processes appear in "info threads". [sidebar: I wouldn't mind "info threads" just showing the threads of the current process, otherwise it might get confusing. ?And given that "info inferiors" is used to show all the processes IWBN if "inferior N" switched to the specified process; a straightforward and intuitive mapping from "info threads" + "thread N".] How about this?
Attachment:
gdb-090507-thread-id-1.patch.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |