Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> writes:
> On Wed, 31 May 2017 16:09:33 +0100
> Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>> The thread-id of 0 means any CPU but we then ignore the fact we find
>> the first_cpu in this case who can have an index of 0. Instead of
>
> The index can never be 0 in system mode actually, but you're right that this
> check doesn't make sense.
>
> The code still looks a bit convoluted IMHO. What about something like the
> following ?
>
> /* 0 means any thread, so we pick the first valid CPU */
> cpu = tmp ? find_cpu(tmp) : first_cpu;
>
> /* invalid CPU/thread specified */
> if (!cpu) {
> res = -EINVAL;
> goto out;
> }
Yeah that will make it cleaner, I'll apply to v2.
>
> Anyway, the fix looks ok.
>
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org>
>
>> bailing out just test if we have managed to match up thread-id to a
>> CPU.
>>
>> Otherwise you get:
>> gdb_handle_packet: command='vCont;C04:0;c'
>> put_packet: reply='E22'
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> gdbstub.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gdbstub.c b/gdbstub.c
>> index a249846954..29c9ed3002 100644
>> --- a/gdbstub.c
>> +++ b/gdbstub.c
>> @@ -934,8 +934,8 @@ static int gdb_handle_vcont(GDBState *s, const char *p)
>> * CPU first, and only then we can use its index.
>> */
>> cpu = find_cpu(idx);
>> - /* invalid CPU/thread specified */
>> - if (!idx || !cpu) {
>> + /* invalid thread specified, cpu not found. */
>> + if (!cpu) {
>> res = -EINVAL;
>> goto out;
>> }
--
Alex Bennée
