From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21227 invoked by alias); 9 May 2011 19:11:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 21219 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2011 19:11:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (74.125.121.67) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 19:11:24 +0000 Received: from hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.7]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p49JBNhi012760 for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 12:11:23 -0700 Received: from gxk23 (gxk23.prod.google.com [10.202.11.23]) by hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p49JBLRn028405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 9 May 2011 12:11:22 -0700 Received: by gxk23 with SMTP id 23so2406245gxk.0 for ; Mon, 09 May 2011 12:11:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.91.23.15 with SMTP id a15mr5882967agj.72.1304968280421; Mon, 09 May 2011 12:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.72.6 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 12:11:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201105032234.36317.pedro@codesourcery.com> References: <20110503202514.5241E2461A9@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <201105032234.36317.pedro@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 19:11:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: replace debug_linux_nat_async with debug_linux_nat ? From: Doug Evans To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00226.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Tuesday 03 May 2011 21:25:14, Doug Evans wrote: >> Hi. >> Anyone mind if I delete linux-nat.c:debug_linux_nat_async >> and replace it with debug_linux_nat? >> >> I've been in some sessions where I turn the latter on >> only to find I also want the former, and from what I read >> I pretty much always want both. > > It's considerably more noisy, and doesn't help much > sync debugging, I dunno, to each his own for these things I guess. Plus I'd like to add more and having to think about sync vs async is time best spent thinking about something else. I wouldn't mind having different levels of verbosity though. > but I won't mind. Thanks. > Especially since > I'd like to flip to async on by default I wonder if sync vs async here is another duality in linux gdb that can go away at some point.