From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11526 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2007 11:49:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 11516 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jul 2007 11:49:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:49:52 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C216982C3; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:49:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A919817A; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 11:49:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IAP5I-0002jI-MJ; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 07:49:48 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:02:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: m.sikorski0@poczta.onet.pl Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Jim Blandy Subject: Re: Remote mutli-threaded debugging with large number of threads Message-ID: <20070716114948.GA10310@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: m.sikorski0@poczta.onet.pl, gdb@sourceware.org, Jim Blandy References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2007-07/txt/msg00127.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 01:38:08PM +0200, m.sikorski0@poczta.onet.pl wrote: > After looking further into it and trying to narrow down issue cause I found out that probably not number of threads does matter here, but amount of debug information or binary size. > The improper case operated on binary of ~17MB (with debug symbols) - after removing symbols from all app threads except of one it seems to be working fine (binary size reduced to ~7MB). > > Does anyone have any comments/suggestions? Is there any configuration change to support large binaries or is this simply a bug in GDB? It is extremely unlikely that this is it either. It is probably some specific characteristic of the second application, e.g. a confusing bit of debug info. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery