From a94799ac1e430404fda5cbc181406cf5f3630108 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Pedro Alves Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:36:46 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Don't set terminal flags twice in a row I find this odd 'set flags twice' ancient code and comment annoyingly distracting. It may well be that the reason for the double-set was simply a copy/paste mistake, and that we've been doing this for decades [1] for no good reason. Let's just get rid of it, and if we find a real reason, add it back with a comment explaining why it's necessary. [1] This double-set was already in gdb 2.4 / 1988, the oldest release we have sources for, and imported in git. From 'git show 7b4ac7e1ed2c inflow.c': +void +terminal_inferior () +{ + if (terminal_is_ours) /* && inferior_thisrun_terminal == 0) */ + { + fcntl (0, F_SETFL, tflags_inferior); + fcntl (0, F_SETFL, tflags_inferior); The "is there a reason" comment was added in 1993, by: commit a88797b5eadf31e21804bc820429028bf708fbcd Author: Fred Fish AuthorDate: Thu Aug 5 01:33:45 1993 +0000 gdb/ChangeLog: 2017-11-06 Pedro Alves * inflow.c (child_terminal_inferior, child_terminal_ours_1): No longer set flags twice in row. --- gdb/ChangeLog | 5 +++++ gdb/inflow.c | 9 --------- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog index ba45ff42395..c569d568ff2 100644 --- a/gdb/ChangeLog +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2017-11-06 Pedro Alves + + * inflow.c (child_terminal_inferior, child_terminal_ours_1): No + longer set flags twice in row. + 2017-11-06 Pedro Alves * Makefile.in (SER_HARDWIRE): Update comment. diff --git a/gdb/inflow.c b/gdb/inflow.c index a96d4fc4a51..d46d6938e27 100644 --- a/gdb/inflow.c +++ b/gdb/inflow.c @@ -244,10 +244,6 @@ child_terminal_inferior (struct target_ops *self) int result; #ifdef F_GETFL - /* Is there a reason this is being done twice? It happens both - places we use F_SETFL, so I'm inclined to think perhaps there - is some reason, however perverse. Perhaps not though... */ - result = fcntl (0, F_SETFL, tinfo->tflags); result = fcntl (0, F_SETFL, tinfo->tflags); OOPSY ("fcntl F_SETFL"); #endif @@ -403,11 +399,6 @@ child_terminal_ours_1 (int output_only) #ifdef F_GETFL tinfo->tflags = fcntl (0, F_GETFL, 0); - - /* Is there a reason this is being done twice? It happens both - places we use F_SETFL, so I'm inclined to think perhaps there - is some reason, however perverse. Perhaps not though... */ - result = fcntl (0, F_SETFL, our_terminal_info.tflags); result = fcntl (0, F_SETFL, our_terminal_info.tflags); #endif } -- 2.30.2