[4/8] Step over thread exit, always delete the thread non-silently
Checks
Context |
Check |
Description |
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_build--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_build--master-arm |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_check--master-arm |
success
|
Testing passed
|
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_gdb_check--master-aarch64 |
success
|
Testing passed
|
Commit Message
With AMD GPU debugging, I noticed that when stepping over a breakpoint
placed on top of the s_endpgm instruction inline (displaced=off), GDB
would behave differently -- it wouldn't print the wave exit. E.g:
With displaced stepping, or no breakpoint at all:
stepi
[AMDGPU Wave 1:4:1:1 (0,0,0)/0 exited]
Command aborted, thread exited.
(gdb)
With inline stepping:
stepi
Command aborted, thread exited.
(gdb)
In the cases we see the "exited" notification, handle_thread_exit is
what first called delete_thread on the exiting thread, which is
non-silent.
With inline stepping, however, handle_thread_exit ends up in
update_thread_list (via restart_threads) before any delete_thread
call. Thus, amd_dbgapi_target::update_thread_list notices that the
wave is gone and deletes it with delete_thread_silent.
This commit fixes it, by making handle_thread_exited call
set_thread_exited (with the default silent=false) early, which emits
the user-visible notification.
Change-Id: I22ab3145e18d07c99dace45576307b9f9d5d966f
---
gdb/infrun.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
@@ -5885,6 +5885,13 @@ handle_thread_exited (execution_control_state *ecs)
update the thread list and delete the event thread. */
bool abort_cmd = (ecs->event_thread->thread_fsm () != nullptr);
+ /* Mark the thread exited right now, because finish_step_over may
+ update the thread list and that may delete the thread silently
+ (depending on target), while we always want to emit the "[Thread
+ ... exited]" notification. Don't actually delete the thread yet,
+ because we need to pass its pointer down to finish_step_over. */
+ set_thread_exited (ecs->event_thread);
+
/* Maybe the thread was doing a step-over, if so release
resources and start any further pending step-overs.
@@ -5904,10 +5911,6 @@ handle_thread_exited (execution_control_state *ecs)
event thread again, as finish_step_over may have switched
threads. */
switch_to_thread (ecs->event_thread);
-
- /* Emit [Thread ... exited] notification. */
- delete_thread (ecs->event_thread);
-
ecs->event_thread = nullptr;
return false;
}