From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6ED63851C1B for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:12:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org A6ED63851C1B Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-314-dM9m3d57MyemNMi5ELcwNw-1; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 17:12:29 -0400 X-MC-Unique: dM9m3d57MyemNMi5ELcwNw-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id j128so320489wmj.6 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:12:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=GzDcZELbx33lkikUzaSnA6rwFT+7c4RP5tvldUTowqE=; b=sF28CuE8hlBXQoiBRMzLpMKVdaKZ9DDXcJ4wEkLwMGODdO+DgxPOUzXoIe08RKux2u uY2mr5Fbsoj6zmzfHeiLRAN9p/f7Xovnt8aoqajoxdxY7ZFymArbxW9VlIdu9dcmSN1S tI9N2F2t+1TSG6oHedwDsY12AX+vUuaFg4tXnOJXOoX27xLxFvj748bnavAW0mlkeqUL UWK75MsGqenxGPFvYR56XRwFC1WGHsbwu5QCCS3vEZuv/6KmoOP4iQNJcJsDdeG1jHCa S23NepVldzRsngM4DOVKbP1RDKjYL/xCovp4cUKMU6NXM0m/VBVbtkhtnT0Onrd3px+W rceQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YUXqNijwhYROWkOFQt/lgsZ0OjuO/GFT/bnfPKZS++NijIcKd tQvw2ak0pMF++CG7efLweNmgzitaZ+i/7JgtGzN4LzKpntfiNJ0EDaRm0iK4FoQrWLQyw0PfXwH JC5/OqqhQQyk= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:4857:: with SMTP id v84mr1170527wma.96.1592255547199; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:12:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy9WBD+tZS5ieIUmZ/viaiIHra5Mr4+U8YBszmmFXpE4MViOAgozYho5nXGlZoAwlziCzC0Rw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:4857:: with SMTP id v84mr1170512wma.96.1592255546908; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:8a0:f922:c400:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b? ([2001:8a0:f922:c400:56ee:75ff:fe8d:232b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a16sm25846845wrx.8.2020.06.15.14.12.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: gdb show thread names To: Jonny Grant , Philippe Waroquiers , gdb@sourceware.org References: <030e3603-12ab-d3cb-afe7-2628acbc18e3@jguk.org> <5e3daadd5ee841b6f6d4ba4948849fa53ffe2107.camel@skynet.be> <9cbff50e-5268-98a9-7648-af53bacc1940@redhat.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 22:12:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 21:12:43 -0000 On 6/15/20 9:53 PM, Jonny Grant wrote: > > > On 15/06/2020 17:21, Philippe Waroquiers wrote: >> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:51 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> >>> Starting program: /home/pedro/brno/pedro/gdb/binutils-gdb/build/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.threads/names/names >>> [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] >>> Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1". >>> [New Thread 0x7ffff74b8700 (LWP 24171) "main"] >>> [New Thread 0x7ffff6cb7700 (LWP 24172) "main"] >>> [New Thread 0x7ffff64b6700 (LWP 24173) "main"] >>> >>> Thread 1 "main" hit Breakpoint 1, all_threads_ready () at /home/pedro/gdb/binutils-gdb/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/names.c:51 >>> 51 } >>> (gdb) info threads >>> Id Target Id Frame >>> * 1 Thread 0x7ffff7fb5740 (LWP 24170) "main" all_threads_ready () at /home/pedro/gdb/binutils-gdb/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/names.c:51 >>> 2 Thread 0x7ffff74b8700 (LWP 24171) "carrot" 0x00007ffff7bc89aa in futex_wait (private=0, expected=4, futex_word=0x7fffffffd604) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/futex-internal.h:61 >>> 3 Thread 0x7ffff6cb7700 (LWP 24172) "potato" 0x00007ffff7bc89aa in futex_wait (private=0, expected=4, futex_word=0x7fffffffd604) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/futex-internal.h:61 >>> 4 Thread 0x7ffff64b6700 (LWP 24173) "celery" 0x00007ffff7bc89aa in futex_wait (private=0, expected=4, futex_word=0x7fffffffd604) at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/futex-internal.h:61 >>> (gdb) >>> >>> I.e., printing the thread name when the thread is created >>> looks more confusing than helpful to me. >> Yes, that is confusing. >> >> And for the following events, when I tried, the patch was far to be ready >> e.g. for the exit events, it gives (for the above): >> (gdb) c >> Continuing. >> [Thread 0x7ffff743d700 (LWP 22783) exited] >> [Thread 0x7ffff7c3e700 (LWP 22782) exited] >> [Thread 0x7ffff7c3f740 (LWP 22778) "main" exited] >> >> So, unclear why there is no carrot, potato or celery in the 2 exited threads >> but "main" is present. >> (and sometimes there is no names in any exited event). >> >> So, when I looked at it, it needed quite some more work ... >> >> Philippe >> > > Hi, Maybe it is more complicated than it is worth after all. > Although, I did think new threads inherited the process executable name, rather than the main() symbol. It's not the main() symbol, it's the name of the parent thread. The testcase does: pthread_setname_np (pthread_self (), "main"); on the main thread before spawning the other threads. So a child thread of "carrot" would be called "carrot" too by default, until it changed its name. If we removed that pthread_setname_np call on the main thread, then the main thread's name would default to the process executable name indeed. If we included the thread id in these notifications instead, I think it would be quite useful. Like, we could have: [Thread 1.2 (0x7ffff74b8700 (LWP 13984)) created] [Thread 1.2 (0x7ffff74b8700 (LWP 13984)) exited] Like we have: [Inferior 1 (process 13980) exited normally] Thanks, Pedro Alves > > It's easy enough for me to press ^C and then type "info threads" so maybe it is fine as it is. > Would start to get awkward if GDB needs to interrupt and poll the proc "comm" file for each LWP etc > > Regards, Jonny >