From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20632 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2008 20:13:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 20623 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jun 2008 20:13:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:12:53 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4799840C; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:12:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D2B9835A; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:12:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K7Fdi-0008Vt-ON; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:12:50 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:13:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Robustify mi-simplerun. Message-ID: <20080613201250.GA32700@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200806132355.42833.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080613200035.GA31920@caradoc.them.org> <200806140010.05202.vladimir@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200806140010.05202.vladimir@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00248.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 12:10:04AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote: > Do you actually think high load will break this? Essentially, we only need > gdb to grab a single slice of processor time before the debugged program gets to > printing, and I'd expect it will, during that second. We can come back to it later then, if it actually causes a problem. Or if I get annoyed at the one-second pause... not likely :-) (The worst offender is completion.exp, which sleeps a lot more than one second.) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery