From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16765 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2010 17:32:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 16752 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Apr 2010 17:32:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from imr2.ericy.com (HELO imr2.ericy.com) (198.24.6.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:32:47 +0000 Received: from eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o3DHZVmY006964; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:36:40 -0500 Received: from EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.20]) by eusaamw0706.eamcs.ericsson.se ([147.117.20.31]) with mapi; Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:31:46 -0400 From: Marc Khouzam To: "'Vladimir Prus'" , "'gdb@sources.redhat.com'" Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:32:00 -0000 Subject: RE: Multiexec MI broke MI compatibility? Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 > -----Original Message----- > From: gdb-owner@sourceware.org=20 > [mailto:gdb-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Vladimir Prus > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 12:54 PM > To: gdb@sources.redhat.com > Subject: Re: Multiexec MI broke MI compatibility? >=20 > Frederic Riss wrote: > > Hi, > >=20 > > I tried to use the latest GDB CVS version with Eclipse Galileo DSF > > Debug launch, and it failed to launch a debug session. I=20 > looked at the > > differences with Fedora's GDB7.0 that works in the same environment > > and found out that the way MI reports threads totally changed. Some > > notifications have changed (eg. thread-group-created became > > thread-group-started), >=20 > This change was intended. >=20 > > the way to identify thread groups has changed > > (thus breaking the way Eclipse did that query)... >=20 > If the change from numeric ids to 'iNNN' broken anything, this is > DSF bug. The strings were *always* documented as opaque. I didn't actually try it myself, but the following was posted to a DSF-GDB bug. Looks like a GDB problem, no? 797,561 9-exec-run 797,562 =3Dthread-group-started,id=3D"i1",pid=3D"24272" <--------- GDB gi= es group id 'i1' 797,562 =3Dthread-created,id=3D"1",group-id=3D"i1" 797,562 9^running 797,562 *running,thread-id=3D"all" 797,562 (gdb)=20 797,587 =3Dlibrary-loaded,id=3D"/lib/ld-linux.so.2",target-name=3D"/lib/ld-linux.so= .2",host-name=3D"/lib/ld-\ linux.so.2",symbols-loaded=3D"0",thread-group=3D"i1" 797,591 =3Dlibrary-loaded,id=3D"/lib/libc.so.6",target-name=3D"/lib/libc.so.6",host= -name=3D"/lib/libc.so.6",\ symbols-loaded=3D"0",thread-group=3D"i1" 797,605 *stopped,reason=3D"breakpoint-hit",disp=3D"del",bkptno=3D"1",frame=3D{addr= =3D"0x080483bd",func=3D"main",\ args=3D[],file=3D"../src/Helloworld.c",fullname=3D"/work1/friss/workspace/H= elloworld/src/Helloworld.c",lin\ e=3D"15"},thread-id=3D"1",stopped-threads=3D"all",core=3D"0" 797,605 (gdb)=20 797,748 10-list-thread-groups i1=20=20=20 797,748 10^error,msg=3D"invalid group id 'i1'" <-------------- when we ask= for the same is, GDB rejects it 797,749 (gdb) > > All that changed > > with the introduction of Multiexec MI. > >=20 > > This leads to some questions: > > - Was that expected? >=20 > The change from thread-group-created to thread-group-started=20 > was intended. > I don't think Marc raised any concerns about that. I was no aware that > any released DSF version has actual support for multiexec. I=20 > am not aware of any other change from documentated behaviour. I don't remember this change at all. Which means nothing really, my memory is swiss cheese these days. But it does seem like a strange choice, since the previous format was already released. We actually use it in DSF-GDB with GDB 7.0. If this change needs to be done, I'm gonna have to have code like if (event.equals("thread-group-created") || event.equals("thread-group-sta= rted") in a couple of places. What is the change meant to improve? > > - What kind of backward compatibility does the MI=20 > interface provide? >=20 > It generally should be backward compatible within given MI=20 > version (currently 2). Except for the above? ;-) > > - Is there a GUI working with the latest GDB and supporting the > > Multiexec features? >=20 > No idea. My guess is that there isn't. At least, there is none in eclipse. But it's planned, if we can find time for it. Marc