diff options
| author | Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> | 2017-11-06 15:36:46 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> | 2017-11-06 16:12:25 +0000 |
| commit | a94799ac1e430404fda5cbc181406cf5f3630108 (patch) | |
| tree | cd5959071b703e783689a3061d48904298bc81ba /gdb/inflow.c | |
| parent | 726e13564b615e5d8e9540b509623e58dfce2012 (diff) | |
| download | fsf-binutils-gdb-a94799ac1e430404fda5cbc181406cf5f3630108.zip fsf-binutils-gdb-a94799ac1e430404fda5cbc181406cf5f3630108.tar.gz fsf-binutils-gdb-a94799ac1e430404fda5cbc181406cf5f3630108.tar.bz2 | |
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 <fnf@specifix.com>
AuthorDate: Thu Aug 5 01:33:45 1993 +0000
gdb/ChangeLog:
2017-11-06 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* inflow.c (child_terminal_inferior, child_terminal_ours_1): No
longer set flags twice in row.
Diffstat (limited to 'gdb/inflow.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | gdb/inflow.c | 9 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 9 deletions
diff --git a/gdb/inflow.c b/gdb/inflow.c index a96d4fc..d46d693 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 } |