[rfa] Include the LWP in thread-db's PTIDs
Wed Dec 8 16:14:00 GMT 2004
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 01:15:59PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 05:36:30PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >>At one time, I believe that thread-db.c was planned to support the full
> >>range of features supported by the libthread_db interface, presumably as
> >>defined by Sun's implementation. That never panned out, and while non-1:1
> >>support did work at one point, I don't think it has in a long while. If
> >>was wanted, I wouldn't re-implement it the same way. So this patch begins
> >>the process of removing unneeded generality from thread-db. In
> >>while thread-db will still compute the TID, the mapping of threads to LWPs
> >>will be considered fixed.
> >>My goal is to have a GNU/Linux target vector, whose entry points call into
> >>thread-db when necessary, instead of having a thread-db wrapper around all
> >>the GNU/Linux methods. One of the things this will fix is the need for
> >>separate versions of the GNU/Linux native wait() code - we will always use
> >>the multi-threaded-aware version. Another thing it will fix is a bug in
> >>fork-following code which tries to find the LWP from a thread ID.
> >>This patch tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu using NPTL; no regressions. OK?
> >Here's the patch, updated to apply to linux-thread-db.c instead. Still
> >no regressions; Mark indicated that the 1:1 assumption seemed reasonable
> >once the file was marked as Linux-specific.
> >Michael, OK to commit?
> Hey, sorry for losing this thread. Yes, this is OK to commit.
Thanks! Checked in.
More information about the Gdb-patches