From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5305 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2001 23:47:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4918 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 23:46:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Dec 2001 23:46:25 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (reddwarf.cygnus.com [205.180.231.12]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13020; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:46:21 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C193D13.AED0F79F@cygnus.com> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:47:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2smp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Don't use thread_db on corefiles References: <20011213114847.A17989@nevyn.them.org> <3C190DDC.B32D6A7B@cygnus.com> <20011213152958.A30211@nevyn.them.org> <3C1931E3.E240B409@cygnus.com> <20011213180259.A11251@nevyn.them.org> <3C1933E7.E2B9DE87@cygnus.com> <20011213181006.A11536@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00368.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 03:04:07PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > > OK. I'd like to see that patch when it's ready. > > Do you use only lwp's, or do you use glibc/libpthread threads? > > If you use library threads, are you saving their info in the > > core file, or are you only saving the info for the lwp's? > > It's completely thread-package-agnostic. I dump all LWPs sharing the > same VM, as a fairly reliable marker (I'd use 2.4 threadgroups, but > LinuxThreads doesn't use them...) Good, dumping only the LWPs is the right thing to do, I think. But if that's what you're doing, then the thread-db module should still be useful to you: I know it is on Solaris, which this one was modelled after. You'll need it if-and-when the thread-to-lwp mapping ever becomes many-to-one (which may be soon). > So there is enough information there for lin-lwp to parse the threads, > if we stubbed out its attempts to write, I expect. But since the > current Linux threads model has one thread per process, I can simply > use the corefile.c thread support instead, which I'd rather do. You can't rely on that assumption in the future. We need to make all these packages work together. It won't be a freebie, it will require some work. But as I say, it works for Solaris gdb. We just didn't bother making it work for Linux gdb and corefiles, because up until now there were no threads in corefiles on Linux. Michael