This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] gdb could leave inferior running as a background process
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:36:01PM -0700, Doug Evans wrote:
> > It seems like there are multiple places where this can happen. E.g.
> > wait_for_inferior -> handle_inferior_event -> find_pc_partial_function
> > -> target_terminal_ours_for_output.
> But by then it's stopped, right? As long as something makes sure we
> give the terminal back after the warning it shouldn't be a problem.
Ah. It's hard to reason about correctness in this part of gdb. I can
see that keep_going calls target_terminal_inferior, but the code paths
are embedded in a big hairy state machine. [I've seen what
wait_for_inferior used to be, things *have* improved though.]