From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26328 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2003 20:21:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26321 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2003 20:21:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 6 Mar 2003 20:21:03 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18r3kk-0006LY-00; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 16:22:14 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18r1rO-0000GA-00; Thu, 06 Mar 2003 15:20:58 -0500 Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: "J. Johnston" , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gcore and nptl threads on linux Message-ID: <20030306202058.GA971@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , "J. Johnston" , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <3E653983.8010005@redhat.com> <20030305005218.GA9222@nevyn.them.org> <3E662E68.7010205@redhat.com> <20030305172511.GB4425@nevyn.them.org> <3E669CA1.2010201@redhat.com> <3E66A408.5020802@redhat.com> <3E67ACDD.6050205@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E67ACDD.6050205@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00125.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 03:17:33PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >>You mean add them to the `struct thread_info' list? Why not (ignoring > >>technical realities for the moment :-)? > > > > > >How about a second list made up of thread_info structs for lwps? That > >way, the current > >thread routines wouldn't have to constantly validate whether the list item > >was > >a thread or lwp. This also would simplify the numbering system. There > >could be equivalent lwp routines for accessing the list (e.g. > >iterate_over_lwps() ). > > Something like that. Is a new term needed though? > > Have the thread and lwp code each have their own instance of a `struct > tpid_info' list (struct context_info list)? Hmm, I'm not sure. Let's take a little while to think about a better name? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer