Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amit Kale <amitkale@linsyssoft.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>,
	        GDB patches <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] preventing resuming of threads in gdbserver
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 07:35:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200601111305.34909.amitkale@linsyssoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060110213945.GA1535@nevyn.them.org>

On Wednesday 11 Jan 2006 3:09 am, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:19:19PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > Amit Kale wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >gdb lets other threads continue execution during single stepping when
> > >doing a single step in remote mode. This behavior causes thread switches
> > >during step or next commands. Native mode behavior is opposite of it.
> > >Attached patch changes it and makes it similar to native mode.
> >
> > Actually, letting other threads continue during single stepping
> > is the norm.  It happens on almost all multi-thread gdb targets.
>
> Michael's right.  It sometimes does not obviously manifest on native
> targets, depending on the implementation of the native system's
> scheduler.

Yes I am convinced that it's just my setup that never shows a thread switch 
during a single step. It might occur in some setup.

> > On the other hand, there is a user-setable mode variable
> > called "scheduler-locking", which is meant to have the exact
> > effect you are looking for.  If you wanted to re-do your patch
> > so that it made this change conditionally, under the control of
> > that variable, it might be more acceptable.
>
> Take a look at the implementation of scheduler-locking; this should
> already work for gdbserver - and there's a testcase for it!

Right. schduler-locking works now.

Thanks.
-Amit


  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-11  7:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-10 12:35 Amit Kale
2006-01-10 21:20 ` Michael Snyder
2006-01-10 21:39   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-01-11  7:35     ` Amit Kale [this message]
2006-01-11  7:17   ` Amit Kale

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200601111305.34909.amitkale@linsyssoft.com \
    --to=amitkale@linsyssoft.com \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=msnyder@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox