This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Introduce utility function find_inferior_ptid
- From: Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at polymtl dot ca>
- Cc: <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 12:01:54 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce utility function find_inferior_ptid
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1418412193-6259-1-git-send-email-simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com> <20141213144058 dot GI5457 at adacore dot com> <548CBBBC dot 1090909 at polymtl dot ca> <20141213233646 dot GP5457 at adacore dot com>
On 2014-12-13 06:36 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Oops, it's a very good thing you made me test the patch again, because
>> there is an horrible, obvious mistake in:
>>
>> struct inferior *
>> find_inferior_ptid (ptid_t ptid) {
>> return find_inferior_ptid (ptid);
>
> So obvious, and yet I missed it...
>
>> No significant changes before/after the patch in the regression suite
>> on amd64 linux.
>>
>> gdb/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * inferior.c (find_inferior_ptid): New function.
>> * inferior.h (find_inferior_ptid): New declaration.
>> * ada-tasks.c (ada_get_task_number): Use find_inferior_ptid.
>> * corelow.c (core_pid_to_str): Same.
>> * darwin-nat.c (darwin_resume): Same.
>> * infrun.c (fetch_inferior_event): Same.
>> (get_inferior_stop_soon): Same.
>> (handle_inferior_event): Same.
>> (handle_signal_stop): Same.
>> * linux-nat.c (resume_lwp): Same.
>> (stop_wait_callback): Same.
>> * mi/mi-interp.c (mi_new_thread): Same.
>> (mi_thread_exit): Same.
>> * proc-service.c (ps_pglobal_lookup): Same.
>> * record-btrace.c (record_btrace_step_thread): Same.
>> * remote-sim.c (gdbsim_close_inferior): Same.
>> (gdbsim_resume): Same.
>> (gdbsim_stop): Same.
>> * sol2-tdep.c (sol2_core_pid_to_str): Same.
>> * target.c (memory_xfer_partial_1): Same.
>> (default_thread_address_space): Same.
>> * thread.c (thread_change_ptid): Same.
>> (switch_to_thread): Same.
>> (do_restore_current_thread_cleanup): Same.
>
> I re-scanned the patch, and it still looks OK to me. Give it
> indeed the weekend in case a good soul looks it over as well,
> but otherwise, go ahead, and push on Monday.
>
> Thank you,
This is pushed, thanks.