From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16794 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 2005 19:07:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 16774 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Nov 2005 19:07:33 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:07:33 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EZCKy-0005La-Rj; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:07:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:07:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: michsnyd@cisco.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] a prototype checkpoint-restart using core files Message-ID: <20051107190724.GA19531@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , michsnyd@cisco.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <43696953.9090601@cisco.com> <20051107001937.GG19200@nevyn.them.org> <200511071857.jA7IvP4K005599@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200511071857.jA7IvP4K005599@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00157.txt.bz2 On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 07:57:25PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Heh, I'd expected Eli to ask for documentation ;-) > > Anyway, in this cause I think that's important since I expect a lot of > users won't understand its limitations. > > If I read the code correctly, there is one rather serious limitation > though: restoring mmapped area's will fail if the same area isn't > mapped in the target process. Especially on systems that randomize > the location of mmapped memory this will make the usefullness of this > feature pretty limited :(. Why should it? The expected use is to restore these dumps into the same running session - just after stepping a bit. So unless you step across a very large free(), it should be fine. I admit the general-purpose rcore command has a lot of limitations, but not as part of a checkpoint-restart system. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC