From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15268 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2008 15:35:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 15220 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Nov 2008 15:35:21 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw2.br.ibm.com (HELO igw2.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:34:32 +0000 Received: from d24relay01.br.ibm.com (unknown [9.8.31.16]) by igw2.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485E217F4D1 for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 13:32:53 -0200 (BRDT) Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by d24relay01.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id mA8FY78X4284556 for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 12:34:07 -0300 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mA8FYSwr002588 for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 13:34:29 -0200 Received: from [9.8.9.146] ([9.8.9.146]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id mA8FYS5P002585; Sat, 8 Nov 2008 13:34:28 -0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] 'catch syscall' feature -- Architecture-independent part From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Durigan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FAnior?= To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <200811071206.31472.pedro@codesourcery.com> References: <1225773079.24532.52.camel@miki> <200811041617.10621.pedro@codesourcery.com> <1226028565.32321.86.camel@miki> <200811071206.31472.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:35:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1226158454.32321.123.camel@miki> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2 Olá Pedro, On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 12:06 +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: > If there any other way to distinguish entry/exit other than a toggle? > Toggles are prone to be fallible. E.g., if you *attach* to a program that > is doing a long syscall, and then start tracing that syscall, > is it possible that you hit the syscall exit first, so your toggle will > be inverted? That is, you'll report a syscall entry, when in fact, it > was a syscall exit, and so on for the following syscalls of the same lwp. The way the patch is designed now, GDB will have exactly this behaviour (inverting syscall entry/exit). If you can think of a better way to do it so that GDB doesn't get confused, I'd be glad to implement. Thanks, -- Sérgio Durigan Júnior Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer Linux Technology Center - LTC IBM Brazil