mgorny added a comment. In D98822#2635647 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D98822#2635647>, @labath wrote:
> Seems mostly ok. The getPidForTid business does not seem completely ideal, > though. I think it may be cleaner to keep the threads for which we have > received the creation event in some kind of a purgatory list until we receive > the corresponding parent event (which will clarify what kind of a child we > are dealing with). > > We actually did something like that a very long time ago, but I removed it > for being too complicated. Now, I think it may be worth going back to it. > > BTW, this made me realize of a funky scenario we may need to handle somehow. > I think it's possible (on linux) that two threads will initiate a fork > operation concurrently, and so by the time that everything stops, we end up > with three (or more) processes... I'm actually working on such a thing right now, though initially for forks. I can surely extend it to threads later. I will update the diff with it in a few minutes. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D98822/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D98822 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
