From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id C488B395252C; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 02:38:49 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org C488B395252C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1670294329; bh=ZPYEWvs3EhLmp/9OVMjbfhBz7xfvfN5bwnwChYF6T4A=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=CFW7+waa/LBASJU2ij9RHNPd71lbzEooYfJE1DHyhVe8dhKwNqkV5Gg2g+qQMF6tq UMRAtBc2YTQWNKlytXKv6trsKMvYpqlw0eliOgvgIsNvGllSEWiJZyeokEuaqgJzS1 fno11K1q56afIUUaU5g6sVDB6NIUhxHTSyWN+E4I= From: "simark at simark dot ca" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug gdb/29854] ^C should interrupt synchronous wait on cooked index completion Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 02:38:49 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: gdb X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: simark at simark dot ca X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29854 Simon Marchi changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |simark at simark dot ca --- Comment #3 from Simon Marchi --- (In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #1) > This seems fine as long as it is just the wait that is > interrupted and not the scan. Yes, that's what I was thinking, just interrupt the main thread's wait. > There doesn't seem to be a good way to interrupt future::wait, > but I suppose the code could use the wait_for variant and check > the quit flag in a loop. Meh :(. > I'm also curious why this is taking long enough to notice. I'm running my unoptimized build of GDB on itself (test gdb.gdb/selftest.ex= p).=20 So arguably not a very important use case. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=