From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFA] process/thread/lwp identifier mega-patch Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 06:29:00 -0000 Message-id: <3A8D3823.8CA8D470@cygnus.com> References: <1001003083922.ZM18831@ocotillo.lan> <3A196C0E.B28DA29@cygnus.com> <1001120185800.ZM17272@ocotillo.lan> <3A1E4BE8.866BCBED@cygnus.com> <3A2748DF.206B4418@eazel.com> <1001204163129.ZM1315@ocotillo.lan> X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00284.html Kevin Buettner wrote: > [...] Kevin, One thought on this (prompted by a side conversation). From memory you had concerns with your memory [groan] (i.e. memory leaks). Have you considered ignoring the problem? Well actually just accumulating a list of all the created threads and then, when GDB re-starts a target, deleting the lot? Yes, this will clearly not scale well in an application that creates then deletes millions of threads. Hopefully though, the benefits (such as improved performance) of having per thread objects will far out way this. I suspect that the way GDB currently tries to delete threads is technically flawed - it only worked because there was really only one thread. A better more robust model needs to be developed but I don't think solving that problem should be part of this patch. The person with the million threads can solve that one :-) Andrew