From: Simon Marchi Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 14:40:03 +0000 (-0500) Subject: gdb: move clearing of tp->pending_follow to follow_fork_inferior X-Git-Url: https://git.libre-soc.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=577d2167bbed078e99fe8b704f936be8ac7cf83d;p=binutils-gdb.git gdb: move clearing of tp->pending_follow to follow_fork_inferior A following patch will change targets so that when they detach an inferior, they also detach any pending fork children this inferior may have. While doing this, I hit a case where we couldn't differentiate two cases, where in one we should detach the fork detach but not in the other. Suppose we continue past a fork with "follow-fork-mode == child" && "detach-on-fork on". follow_fork_inferior calls target_detach to detach the parent. In that case the target should not detach the fork child, as we'll continue debugging the child. As of now, the tp->pending_follow field of the thread who called fork still contains the details about the fork. Then, suppose we run to a fork catchpoint and the user types "detach". In that case, the target should detach the fork child in addition to the parent. In that case as well, the tp->pending_follow field contains the details about the fork. To allow targets to differentiate the two cases, clear tp->pending_follow a bit earlier, when following a fork. Targets will then see that tp->pending_follow contains TARGET_WAITKIND_SPURIOUS, and won't detach the fork child. As of this patch, no behavior changes are expected. Change-Id: I537741859ed712cb531baaefc78bb934e2a28153 --- diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c index e4739ed14f6..a1264f77f9b 100644 --- a/gdb/infrun.c +++ b/gdb/infrun.c @@ -601,6 +601,23 @@ holding the child stopped. Try \"set detach-on-fork\" or \ if (child_inf != nullptr) gdb_assert (!child_inf->thread_list.empty ()); + /* Clear the parent thread's pending follow field. Do this before calling + target_detach, so that the target can differentiate the two following + cases: + + - We continue past a fork with "follow-fork-mode == child" && + "detach-on-fork on", and therefore detach the parent. In that + case the target should not detach the fork child. + - We run to a fork catchpoint and the user types "detach". In that + case, the target should detach the fork child in addition to the + parent. + + The former case will have pending_follow cleared, the later will have + pending_follow set. */ + thread_info *parent_thread = find_thread_ptid (parent_inf, parent_ptid); + gdb_assert (parent_thread != nullptr); + parent_thread->pending_follow.set_spurious (); + /* Detach the parent if needed. */ if (follow_child) { @@ -668,7 +685,6 @@ follow_fork () { bool follow_child = (follow_fork_mode_string == follow_fork_mode_child); bool should_resume = true; - struct thread_info *tp; /* Copy user stepping state to the new inferior thread. FIXME: the followed fork child thread should have a copy of most of the @@ -714,7 +730,7 @@ follow_fork () } } - tp = inferior_thread (); + thread_info *tp = inferior_thread (); /* If there were any forks/vforks that were caught and are now to be followed, then do so now. */ @@ -768,14 +784,6 @@ follow_fork () } else { - /* This pending follow fork event is now handled, one way - or another. The previous selected thread may be gone - from the lists by now, but if it is still around, need - to clear the pending follow request. */ - tp = find_thread_ptid (parent_targ, parent); - if (tp) - tp->pending_follow.set_spurious (); - /* This makes sure we don't try to apply the "Switched over from WAIT_PID" logic above. */ nullify_last_target_wait_ptid ();