From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17782 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2007 09:47:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 17774 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jan 2007 09:47:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.184) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:47:41 +0000 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id n28so1856694nfc for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:47:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.152.16 with SMTP id z16mr556744bud.1168854457936; Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:47:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.168.9 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:47:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9560bc3b0701150147s793b9f97y44ba89fb6e72b350@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:47:00 -0000 From: "Yaki Tebeka" To: "Jim Blandy" , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Resuming a single suspended thread on Linux In-Reply-To: <20070107233002.GA28520@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9560bc3b0701061449s6d240616o788d93f472a578b8@mail.gmail.com> <9560bc3b0701070900q515a8c5cu1f539506d4018c06@mail.gmail.com> <20070107233002.GA28520@nevyn.them.org> 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: 2007-01/txt/msg00247.txt.bz2 Hi Daniel and Jim I tried the suggested solution, but unfortunately, it does not seem to work. I am running Fedora Core 5, 64 bit on an AMD processor. After I call "set scheduler-locking on", and "continue", the entire debugged process seem to remain freeze. I tried setting my data collection thread as the active thread and even setting the main thread as the active thread, but both options does not seem to work. Do you know if its a GDB bug, or an "expected behaviour" on Linux? Can you suggest another solution to my problem? Thanks Yaki On 1/8/07, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 07:00:26PM +0200, Yaki Tebeka wrote: > > Hi Jim > > > > Thanks for the suggested solution. > > > > I read the "set scheduler-locking" feature documentation few times > > (http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb_6.html#IDX281) and I > > must admit that I am not quite sure that I understand it correctly... > > > > One of it sentences says that the other threads are "completely free > > to run when you use commands like `continue', `until', or `finish'". > > If I understand this correctly, it will not help in my case. > > > > Please let me know if I didn't understand this mechanism correctly. > > That sentence only describes the behavior when you set it to "step". > If you set it to "on", you can run just a single thread. > > > -- > Daniel Jacobowitz > CodeSourcery > -- Yaki Tebeka