Hi! On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:17:21 +0100, Pedro Alves <pal...@redhat.com> wrote: > Here's what I pushed
..., and what made the Hurd port pretty unhappy. ;-) > gdb/ > 2013-10-24 Pedro Alves <pal...@redhat.com> > > * NEWS (New options): Mention set/show startup-with-shell. > * config/alpha/nm-osf3.h (START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED): Set to 2 > instead of 3. > * fork-child.c (fork_inferior, startup_inferior): Handle 'set > startup-with-shell'. > (show_startup_with_shell): New function. > (_initialize_fork_child): Register the set/show startup-with-shell > commands. > * inf-ptrace.c (inf_ptrace_create_inferior): Remove comment. > * inf-ttrace.c (inf_ttrace_him): Remove comment. > * procfs.c (procfs_init_inferior): Remove comment. > * infcmd.c (startup_with_shell): New global. > * inferior.h (startup_with_shell): Declare global. > (STARTUP_WITH_SHELL): Delete. > (START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED): Set to 1 by default instead of 2. > --- a/gdb/fork-child.c > +++ b/gdb/fork-child.c > @@ -419,6 +419,12 @@ startup_inferior (int ntraps) > int terminal_initted = 0; > ptid_t resume_ptid; > > + if (startup_with_shell) > + { > + /* One trap extra for exec'ing the shell. */ > + pending_execs++; > + } > + > --- a/gdb/inferior.h > +++ b/gdb/inferior.h > @@ -346,25 +365,12 @@ struct displaced_step_closure > *get_displaced_step_closure_by_addr (CORE_ADDR add > +/* Number of traps that happen between exec'ing the shell to run an > + inferior and when we finally get to the inferior code, not counting > + the exec for the shell. This is 1 on most implementations. > + Overridden in nm.h files. */ > #if !defined(START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED) > -#define START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED 2 > +#define START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED 1 > #endif I'd like to push the following, to get the Hurd port functional again. In the thread around <http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C200810110047.39807.pedro%40codesourcery.com%3E>, and <http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C200810131935.35253.pedro%40codesourcery.com%3E>, we had already (very) briefly been discussing gnu-nat's local pending_execs handling. Is the new approach that I'm posting below (flag instead of counting; saves us from repeating in gnu_create_inferior the increment in the startup_with_shell case) OK until we get a clear understanding if and how we can get rid of it for good? Or should indeed the current value of fork-child.c:startup_inferior's pending_execs be made available, say by moving that variable into inferior.h:struct inferior, and using that in gnu-nat.c instead of gnu-nat.c:struct inf's local pending_execs "replica"? (But apparently there are no other users of this.) commit 57c9fb3afadab5813d7463dc2393d5affe78849e Author: Thomas Schwinge <tho...@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed Jan 8 21:42:07 2014 +0100 Hurd: Adjust to startup-with-shell changes. In commit 98882a26513e25b2161b41dfd4bed97b59b2c01a, STARTUP_WITH_SHELL was made a runtime toggle, startup-with-shell. The Hurd code not adjusted, which had a value hard-coded instead of using START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED. Fix that, and also simplify gnu-nat's pending_execs handling from counting to just a flag. gdb/ * gnu-nat.c (struct inf): Change pending_execs member to a 1-bit flag. Adjust all users; in particular... (gnu_wait): ..., don't decrement its value in here... (gnu_create_inferior): ..., and instead set the flag in here, around the startup_inferior call, and call that one with START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED. diff --git gdb/gnu-nat.c gdb/gnu-nat.c index 26db81a..5538af5 100644 --- gdb/gnu-nat.c +++ gdb/gnu-nat.c @@ -210,9 +210,9 @@ struct inf unsigned int no_wait:1; /* When starting a new inferior, we don't try to validate threads until all - the proper execs have been done. This is a count of how many execs we + the proper execs have been done, which this flag states we still expect to happen. */ - unsigned pending_execs; + unsigned int pending_execs:1; /* Fields describing global state. */ @@ -1568,26 +1568,14 @@ rewait: while execing. */ { w->suppress = 1; - inf_debug (inf, "pending_execs = %d, ignoring minor event", - inf->pending_execs); + inf_debug (inf, "pending_execs, ignoring minor event"); } else if (kind == TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED && w->status.value.sig == GDB_SIGNAL_TRAP) /* Ah hah! A SIGTRAP from the inferior while starting up probably means we've succesfully completed an exec! */ { - if (--inf->pending_execs == 0) - /* We're done! */ - { -#if 0 /* do we need this? */ - prune_threads (1); /* Get rid of the old shell - threads. */ - renumber_threads (0); /* Give our threads reasonable - names. */ -#endif - } - inf_debug (inf, "pending exec completed, pending_execs => %d", - inf->pending_execs); + inf_debug (inf, "one pending exec completed"); } else if (kind == TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED) /* It's possible that this signal is because of a crashed process @@ -2146,7 +2134,7 @@ gnu_create_inferior (struct target_ops *ops, push_target (ops); - inf->pending_execs = 2; + inf->pending_execs = 1; inf->nomsg = 1; inf->traced = 1; @@ -2158,7 +2146,8 @@ gnu_create_inferior (struct target_ops *ops, thread_change_ptid (inferior_ptid, ptid_build (inf->pid, inf_pick_first_thread (), 0)); - startup_inferior (inf->pending_execs); + startup_inferior (START_INFERIOR_TRAPS_EXPECTED); + inf->pending_execs = 0; inf_validate_procinfo (inf); inf_update_signal_thread (inf); Grüße, Thomas
pgpFTdvlSqEsT.pgp
Description: PGP signature