From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15327 invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2004 16:14:04 -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 15285 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2004 16:13:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 29 Nov 2004 16:13:59 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1CYoA2-0000Q9-4K; Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:13:58 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:50:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney , Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Burgess , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: new option --readnever & script gstack? Message-ID: <20041129161358.GB1494@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Burgess , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <41A24D4E.6090301@redhat.com> <01c4d151$Blat.v2.2.2$ca52d9c0@zahav.net.il> <41A363FE.9060307@redhat.com> <01c4d19d$Blat.v2.2.2$0109b2e0@zahav.net.il> <01c4d1f2$Blat.v2.2.2$5a3f3880@zahav.net.il> <41AB492A.8070804@gnu.org> <20041129161137.GA1494@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041129161137.GA1494@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 11:11:37AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 11:07:06AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > Yes, the objective is to get in, get a minimal backtrace, and get out. > > Apparently this is a relatively common task in production environments - > > a few seconds down time is considered acceptable but not a few minutes > > (that's the magnitude difference I'm seeing :-/). I also don't see the > > option as being pstack specific - this technique is equally applicable > > to other scripts - gcore comes to mind - again only minimal symbol > > information being required. > > > > So, ..., would a gstack.sh script and an option to disable symbolic > > debug information reading be useful additions to GDB? Oh, two other things. I liked Frank's suggestion: Or alternately, could the "asneeded" setting stay as it is, but extend gdb's backtrace command to have a sufficiently non-symbolic mode, where the "asneeded" data would not be needed and thus not loaded? And I don't think we need a command line option for this. Would a "set" be enough? You're going to have to feed a command file to GDB anyway to get the backtrace. -- Daniel Jacobowitz