[PATCH v1] gdb/dap - Getting thread names

[PATCH v1] gdb/dap - Getting thread names

[Simon Farre]

When testing firefox tests, it is apparent that
_get_threads returns threads with name field = None.

I had initially thought that this was due to Firefox setting the names
using /proc/pid/task/tid/comm, by writing directly to the proc fs the
names, but apparently GDB seems to catch this, because I re-wrote
the basic-dap.exp/c to do this specifically and it saw the changes.

So I couldn't determine right now, what operation of name change that
GDB does not pick up, but with this patch, GDB will pick up the thread
names for an applications that set the name of a thread in ways that
aren't obvious.
---
 gdb/python/lib/gdb/dap/threads.py | 8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gdb/python/lib/gdb/dap/threads.py b/gdb/python/lib/gdb/dap/threads.py
index c3b42ee4991..b61fb94dce8 100644
--- a/gdb/python/lib/gdb/dap/threads.py
+++ b/gdb/python/lib/gdb/dap/threads.py
@@ -18,6 +18,12 @@ import gdb
 from .server import request
 from .startup import send_gdb_with_response, in_gdb_thread
 
+def thread_name(thr):
+    if thr.name is not None:
+        return thr.name
+    if thr.details is not None:
+        return thr.details
+    return None
 
 # A helper function to construct the list of threads.
 @in_gdb_thread
@@ -27,7 +33,7 @@ def _get_threads():
         one_result = {
             "id": thr.global_num,
         }
-        name = thr.name
+        name = thread_name(thr)
         if name is not None:
             one_result["name"] = name
         result.append(one_result)
-- 
2.40.1

Re: [PATCH v1] gdb/dap - Getting thread names

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Farre via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:

Thanks for the patch.

Simon>  from .startup import send_gdb_with_response, in_gdb_thread
 
Simon> +def thread_name(thr):

It's a convention in the DAP code for internal functions to start with
"_", and also to have a descriptive comment.  Also make sure you run
'black' on the patch (I suspect it would add another blank line before
the def, not sure though).

This is ok with those changes.

Tom