From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16181 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 2003 16:14:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16171 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2003 16:14:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Nov 2003 16:14:46 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1AI9G1-0007dL-AG for ; Fri, 07 Nov 2003 11:14:45 -0500 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:14:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: filtering of commands during async operation Message-ID: <20031107161445.GB29307@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2 On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:00:20AM -0500, Newman, Mark (N-Superior Technical Resource Inc) wrote: > > > > From: Elena Zannoni [mailto:ezannoni@redhat.com] > ..... > > > > > Next a request - Could you add "tfind", "tdump", "tstart", > > and "tstop" > > > to the list of acceptable commands? I know that if I am using > > > tracepoints to monitor what is going on in a system I > > don't want to wait > > > and hope that whatever event I am monitoring for occurs. > > I want to be > > > able to look at the tracepoints while they are occurring. > > > > > > > > > It sounds like a sensible change, however I'd like to know a bit more > > about the direction you are headed. Surely such a change would be a > > candidate for a patch. > > > > I am not certain what you mean by where I am headed. My near term > objective is to get tracepoints running in the background and to provide > some additions that I typically put in a debugger. > > I added some support for tracepoints in gdbserver. I then tested that > in the foreground. It seemed that everyone writing to the lists at the > time was doing that. That resulted in couple (3) of bug finds that were > fixed. > > I provided a patch and a bug report (actually an enhancement - which I > cannot find now) that allows tracepoints to run while in async mode. I > am now looking at running tracepoints in the background. That resulted > in this thread. > > I am headed at getting tracepoints to the point where I can start a > remote target running, establish tracepoints, and then go in and peek > and poke through those tracepoints without disturbing the remote process > (as Jim's and Michael's Heisenberg paper talked about). I am trying to > go a step further than their paper by allowing one to inspect the > tracepoints while the remote is running, collecting, and hopefully not > being perturbed. This is something I have done in the past with some > commercial debuggers and I am tired of doing and redoing it. Hi Mark, Are you planning to also contribute the gdbserver support for these feature? I'd love to see it added. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer