This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
RE: [RFA] gdb/win32-nat.c Step the correct thread
- From: "Pierre Muller" <muller at ics dot u-strasbg dot fr>
- To: <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 22:53:23 +0100
- Subject: RE: [RFA] gdb/win32-nat.c Step the correct thread
- References: <002801c8329e$d726e090$8574a1b0$@u-strasbg.fr> <20071202024620.GC15745@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Faylor
> Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 3:46 AM
> To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Pierre Muller
> Subject: Re: [RFA] gdb/win32-nat.c Step the correct thread
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 04:45:17PM +0100, Pierre Muller wrote:
> > While trying to understand the SuspendThread
> >counting problems, I tried to single step after changing
> >thread, and I noticed that the next event always
> >brought me back to the main thread.
> >
> > There is a bug in the current win32-nat.c source
> >which places the trace bit always in the
> >main thread, while we should step the thread identified by
> >inferior_ptid.
> >
> > This simple patch corrects this.
> >
> >The testsuite runs with and without this patch
> >show no difference.
> >
> >OK to check in?
>
> Ok.
Thanks, applied.
I am preparing a patch that
will get the win32 port of gdb to
honor the
set schechuler-locking on
which stipulates that only the stepped thread
will be allowed to executed and all other threads
are suspended.
The only problem is that I need to reintroduce
the suspend_count field in thread_info record
for that to work.
Pierre