From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12856 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2006 17:54:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 12841 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Nov 2006 17:53:58 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:53:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96A6248D06A; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:53:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 10744-01-3; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:53:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (unknown [70.71.0.212]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12EC248CDE2; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 12:53:48 -0500 (EST) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3BACC34C099; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 09:54:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:54:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [x86_64-linux] ptrace (PT_STEP) causes 2 instruction step??? Message-ID: <20061124175411.GB3536@adacore.com> References: <20061123042227.GA22601@adacore.com> <4303.192.87.1.22.1164270920.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4303.192.87.1.22.1164270920.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-11/txt/msg00168.txt.bz2 Hi Mark, > This must be a kernel bug of some sorts. Was the kernel on those machines > updated? That's what I figured. The kernels have not been upgraded. The kernel version changes from distribution to distribution and the actual version of the distro. > Are you perhaps running vmware on those machines? My amd64 box at work > seems to do something similar from time to time when I have it running > (random testfailures) but everything seems normal if I close vmware. That was a good suggestion, but we're not running vmware. I'm trying to get one of our sysadmins to upgrade the kernel. > Anyway, it is almost certainly something we (GDB developers) can't do > anything about. That's what I thought too, but I was wondering is someone else knew more about this issue. I'll let everyone know if a kernel upgrade helps. Thanks to everyone for the feedback, -- Joel