From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BCBF3858D37 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2022 02:36:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 5BCBF3858D37 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 20N2aMti005303 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 22 Jan 2022 21:36:27 -0500 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 20N2aMti005303 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (192-222-157-6.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.157.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BD331EE1F; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 21:36:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <73c0f0ab-5b4f-761d-00fa-d589cd83c5f1@polymtl.ca> Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 21:36:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] gdb, ptid: add is_lwp() and is_lwp_or_pid() Content-Language: en-US To: Markus Metzger , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20211202071525.3046816-1-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <20211202071525.3046816-4-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <20211202071525.3046816-4-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Sun, 23 Jan 2022 02:36:22 +0000 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3039.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 02:36:30 -0000 On 2021-12-02 02:15, Markus Metzger wrote: > Add member functions to check whether a ptid is a single light-weight > process and whether a ptid is a light-weight or full process. > --- > gdbsupport/ptid.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/gdbsupport/ptid.h b/gdbsupport/ptid.h > index 7cdf468589d..08a818ceb59 100644 > --- a/gdbsupport/ptid.h > +++ b/gdbsupport/ptid.h > @@ -89,6 +89,24 @@ class ptid_t > && m_tid == 0); > } > > + /* Return true if the ptid represents a light-weight process. */ > + > + constexpr bool is_lwp () const > + { > + return (*this != make_null () > + && *this != make_minus_one () > + && !is_pid ()); What about the tid field? Just reading the name `is_lwp`, my intuition would be that it checks for a null tid field. So calling is_lwp on (1, 2, 3) or (1, 0, 3) would return false. At this point it might be easier to write it as: return m_pid > 0 && m_lwp > 0 && m_tid == 0; > + } > + > + /* Return true if the ptid represents a light-weight process or a whole > + process. */ > + > + constexpr bool is_lwp_or_pid () const > + { > + return (*this != make_null () > + && *this != make_minus_one ()); > + } > + Same concern, what about tid? Simon