This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Stand resume() on its head


On Nov 5,  3:28pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:


There have now been several discussion threads that lead to the conclusion that

target->resume (ptid_t, int, enum target_signal)

needs changing. At present the suggestion is to add a parameter to indicate schedule locking and similar operations.

I'd like to propose a different approach. Instead of passing to resume() what to do, have resume() iterate over all the threads asking each what it should do - suspend, step, run, signal, ...

Sounds reasonable.  (In fact, it seems a whole lot more workable than
the other approach.)
Yep, figure out the worst case and solve that - then discover that the solution is better than the other partial approaches :-)

Andrew


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]