gdb: maintain per-process-target list of resumed threads with pending wait status

Looking up threads that are both resumed and have a pending wait
status to report is something that we do quite often in the fast path
and is expensive if there are many threads, since it currently requires
walking whole thread lists.

The first instance is in maybe_set_commit_resumed_all_targets.  This is
called after handling each event in fetch_inferior_event, to see if we
should ask targets to commit their resumed threads or not.  If at least
one thread is resumed but has a pending wait status, we don't ask the
targets to commit their resumed threads, because we want to consume and
handle the pending wait status first.

The second instance is in random_pending_event_thread, where we want to
select a random thread among all those that are resumed and have a
pending wait status.  This is called every time we try to consume
events, to see if there are any pending events that we we want to
consume, before asking the targets for more events.

To allow optimizing these cases, maintain a per-process-target list of
threads that are resumed and have a pending wait status.

In maybe_set_commit_resumed_all_targets, we'll be able to check in O(1)
if there are any such threads simply by checking whether the list is
empty.

In random_pending_event_thread, we'll be able to use that list, which
will be quicker than iterating the list of threads, especially when
there are no resumed with pending wait status threads.

About implementation details: using the new setters on class
thread_info, it's relatively easy to maintain that list.  Any time the
"resumed" or "pending wait status" property is changed, we check whether
that should cause the thread to be added or removed from the list.

In set_thread_exited, we try to remove the thread from the list, because
keeping an exited thread in that list would make no sense (especially if
the thread is freed).  My first implementation assumed that a process
stratum target was always present when set_thread_exited is called.
That's however, not the case: in some cases, targets unpush themselves
from an inferior and then call "exit_inferior", which exits all the
threads.  If the target is unpushed before set_thread_exited is called
on the threads, it means we could mistakenly leave some threads in the
list.  I tried to see how hard it would be to make it such that targets
have to exit all threads before unpushing themselves from the inferior
(that would seem logical to me, we don't want threads belonging to an
inferior that has no process target).  That seemed quite difficult and
not worth the time at the moment.  Instead, I changed
inferior::unpush_target to remove all threads of that inferior from the
list.

As of this patch, the list is not used, this is done in the subsequent
patches.

The debug messages in process-stratum-target.c need to print some ptids.
However, they can't use target_pid_to_str to print them without
introducing a dependency on the current inferior (the current inferior
is used to get the current target stack).  For debug messages, I find it
clearer to print the spelled out ptid anyway (the pid, lwp and tid
values).  Add a ptid_t::to_string method that returns a string
representation of the ptid that is meant for debug messages, a bit like
we already have frame_id::to_string.

Change-Id: Iad8f93db2d13984dd5aa5867db940ed1169dbb67

1 files changed, 40 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gdb/thread.c b/gdb/thread.c
index 289d33c..74d6b90 100644
--- a/gdb/thread.c
+++ b/gdb/thread.c
@@ -188,6 +188,17 @@ set_thread_exited (thread_info *tp, bool silent)
 
   if (tp->state != THREAD_EXITED)
     {
+      process_stratum_target *proc_target = tp->inf->process_target ();
+
+      /* Some targets unpush themselves from the inferior's target stack before
+         clearing the inferior's thread list (which marks all threads as exited,
+         and therefore leads to this function).  In this case, the inferior's
+         process target will be nullptr when we arrive here.
+
+         See also the comment in inferior::unpush_target.  */
+      if (proc_target != nullptr)
+	proc_target->maybe_remove_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (tp);
+
       gdb::observers::thread_exit.notify (tp, silent);
 
       /* Tag it as exited.  */
@@ -296,12 +307,38 @@ thread_info::deletable () const
 /* See gdbthread.h.  */
 
 void
+thread_info::set_resumed (bool resumed)
+{
+  if (resumed == m_resumed)
+    return;
+
+  process_stratum_target *proc_target = this->inf->process_target ();
+
+  /* If we transition from resumed to not resumed, we might need to remove
+     the thread from the resumed threads with pending statuses list.  */
+  if (!resumed)
+    proc_target->maybe_remove_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (this);
+
+  m_resumed = resumed;
+
+  /* If we transition from not resumed to resumed, we might need to add
+     the thread to the resumed threads with pending statuses list.  */
+  if (resumed)
+    proc_target->maybe_add_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (this);
+}
+
+/* See gdbthread.h.  */
+
+void
 thread_info::set_pending_waitstatus (const target_waitstatus &ws)
 {
   gdb_assert (!this->has_pending_waitstatus ());
 
   m_suspend.waitstatus = ws;
   m_suspend.waitstatus_pending_p = 1;
+
+  process_stratum_target *proc_target = this->inf->process_target ();
+  proc_target->maybe_add_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (this);
 }
 
 /* See gdbthread.h.  */
@@ -311,6 +348,9 @@ thread_info::clear_pending_waitstatus ()
 {
   gdb_assert (this->has_pending_waitstatus ());
 
+  process_stratum_target *proc_target = this->inf->process_target ();
+  proc_target->maybe_remove_resumed_with_pending_wait_status (this);
+
   m_suspend.waitstatus_pending_p = 0;
 }