This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v2] Always pass signals to the right thread.
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 15:13:34 +0300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Always pass signals to the right thread.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1403183341-12581-1-git-send-email-palves at redhat dot com> <53A790DB dot 40908 at codesourcery dot com> <53A9648F dot 1030006 at redhat dot com> <53D128FA dot 6030901 at redhat dot com> <838unhkciw dot fsf at gnu dot org> <53D2323D dot 6040506 at redhat dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 11:32:29 +0100
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> > @emph{Note:} When resuming a multi-threaded program, @var{signal} is
> > by default delivered to the currently selected thread, not the thread
> > that last reported a stop. This includes the situation where a thread
> > was stopped due to a signal. So if you want to continue execution
> > suppressing the signal that stopped a thread, you should select that
> > same thread before issuing the @samp{signal 0} command. If you issue
> > the @samp{signal 0} command with another thread as the selected one,
> > @value{GDBN} detects that and asks for confirmation.
> >
> > Otherwise, OK.
>
> That looks great, thanks a lot! Would you mind if I drop the "by default",
> though? When I read that I get the impression that there might be a knob
> to configure this behavior, while there's none (and nor should there be one).
You mean, if GDB asks for confirmation, per the above, and the user
confirms, GDB still won't signal the other thread? If it will, then
there's your knob.
But I agree to remove "by default" from this text.