From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.160.84]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9169A385B195 for ; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 10:04:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9169A385B195 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE32ACADD; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 11:04:09 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qf7M8I3Jw1xy; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 11:04:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (p50854a7a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.133.74.122]) (Authenticated sender: ro) by smtp.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2E44ACF99; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 11:04:08 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE; s=20200306; t=1669370649; bh=7V6qREJ3kLouiTns2lC+0XWdZkxleXyRr8o3rvBhZsY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=L1od8fKvUIe0WoaDo9exb1sLFbVq6JWVXZ8WHROYT4kx638ht5h/CeI0o5+Q5+1ZK kB8SnF2ScmnQpVqOdPjkMacXZf77yTjnPZ5jhnYMhnCLxKWnM+BSRntFMBfawJdFn3 KMDTblWvmmt5Jz0RKbOQHu/wpilKdq4ls+KmPbpFHPxZU2jmEMEtLpG4TTCLmWLVVp +vqkLMP3DaqzkHnXt4eytLzMG2q/VpOxRM8OopQDJpLAyjGzsi7e+dybdUldhDua1A nJLdQNjiEiYh9RWfgVFTDe5Y1Eu/Q/iYc9WAejFVDTEjDhZkCEw2gNlHpC2BlJzqOh dFFuuF7u3L95A== From: Rainer Orth To: Andrew Burgess Cc: Andrew Burgess , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix expected received signal message in testsuite References: <20190913221823.GV6076@embecosm.com> <87sfi82vg4.fsf@redhat.com> <87o7sw2sfd.fsf@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 11:04:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87o7sw2sfd.fsf@redhat.com> (Andrew Burgess's message of "Thu, 24 Nov 2022 17:06:30 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3788.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Andrew, > So, to clarify this a little, the discrepancy seems to arise from > lwp_to_thread, this is where we query libthread-db. > > Before this point, in sol_thread_target::wait, we call: > > ptid_t rtnval = beneath ()->wait (ptid, ourstatus, options); > > this returns us the (maybe?) expected ptid_t {m_pid = 7218, m_lwp = 1, > m_tid = 0}, then when we call lwp_to_thread, we get back the alternative > ptid_t where the tid field is set, but the lwp field is not. > > I don't know if this indicates a bug in libthread-db, or a bug in GDB. I wouldn't suspect libthread_db itself, but rather the sol-thread.c code. I guess I'll have to do a debug build of gdb and find what's going on. Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University