From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1250 invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2007 20:04:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 1240 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jan 2007 20:04:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.Sun.COM (HELO sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com) (192.18.43.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 20:04:31 +0000 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com ([129.145.155.42]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l0PK4T5b013551 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:04:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from luai12.sfbay.sun.com (luai12.SFBay.Sun.COM [10.6.186.42]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l0PK4Spo025575; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:04:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from luai12.sfbay.sun.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by luai12.sfbay.sun.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l0PK4S7X031029; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:04:28 -0800 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by luai12.sfbay.sun.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id l0PK4Sdl031028; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:04:28 -0800 To: gdb Subject: Re: multithreaded core files References: <20070125194840.GA20591@nevyn.them.org> From: David Carlton Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 20:04:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20070125194840.GA20591@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Thu, 25 Jan 2007 14:48:40 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2007-01/txt/msg00325.txt.bz2 On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 14:48:40 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz said: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 11:40:42AM -0800, David Carlton wrote: >> One of my coworkers is looking at a core file from a multithreaded >> program. (x86 Linux.) In this situation, GDB only prints a backtrace >> from the thread that actually seg faulted; he'd like to see what other >> threads were doing at the time. > It should already print all the backtraces. If it doesn't, the usual > explanation is that you are using a broken kernel version which does > not save registers for every thread. Many 2.4 kernels fit that > description. Interesting. I guess I got stuck in my mind from the 2.4 days that this doesn't work; checking a recent core file, I see the information I want. I'll check with my coworker to see what the vintage is of his core file... David Carlton david.carlton@sun.com