Re: [RFC] stept, nextt, finisht, untilt, continuet

pfee
2011-08-30T12:42:12Z

> > I like the 'step' mode of scheduler-locking, but often wish it applied to
>the
>

> > "next" command, not just step.
>
> I agree, it does not apply to the continue-over-call part of `next'. But
that
> is a bug which should be fixed.
>
>
> > My suggestion would be to create a "set scheduler-locking next" mode in
>which
>
> > both "step" and "next" operate with other threads locked out.
>
> Do you think the "step" mode would be still useful if "next" exists?

To be honest, I would always use "set scheduler-locking next" if it existed and
would never use "step" locking mode.

My suggestion was influenced by a desire to minimise the code changes. It would
be better for me if "set scheduler-locking step" was replaced with "set
scheduler-locking next" though I haven't investigated how easy that would be to
implement.

Another point, regarding "continue". In non-stop mode, there's a "-a" flag to
continue all threads. Would it be worth using the same flag when in
scheduler-locking mode to cause the entire process to resume?

Thanks,
Paul