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: [RFA]: Modified Watchthreads Patch


> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:04:40 -0500
> From: Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> > What does it mean ``officially attached''?  Can a thread be attached
> > to ``unofficially''?
> 
> I'm referring to the act of gdb recognizing the thread.  The
> function itself is called attach_thread but it has a #ifdef
> governing whether a low-level ATTACH is required or not.  Gdb now
> recognizes it has "attached" to the thread whether a physical attach
> is needed or not.  I can drop the "officially" qualifier if it is
> confusing.

It should either be dropped or replaced with an explanation of when
exactly the thread attachment causes the observer to be invoked.  I'd
prefer the latter (i.e. a more detailed explanation), but if that is
impractical because too many irrelevant details are involved, then
let's just drop the qualifier.


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