From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3422 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2010 18:24:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 3412 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Aug 2010 18:24:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:24:00 -0000 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Kevin Buettner Cc: archer@sourceware.org, utrace-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: Q: %Stop && gdb crash Message-ID: <20100805182132.GA28028@redhat.com> References: <20100721204203.D040C400B6@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20100723173134.GA29717@redhat.com> <20100726142759.GA17171@redhat.com> <20100728181702.GA26678@redhat.com> <20100802235358.GA9720@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100803122434.GA32698@redhat.com> <20100803131436.GA2185@redhat.com> <20100803125651.009f0f07@mesquite.lan> <20100804193935.GA20294@redhat.com> <20100804163205.11c5d7c9@mesquite.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100804163205.11c5d7c9@mesquite.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SW-Source: 2010-q3/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 Kevin, I am sorry for the delays. I try to avoid reading emails to make the new (heh, initial again ;) all-in-kernel version asap. On 08/04, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 21:39:35 +0200 > Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > I'd be curious to know if the behavior improves when you omit > > > "set target-async on" and "set non-stop". > > > > Yes, it works without target-async ;) > > I think that using "set target-async on" is probably very buggy as it > is not used very often. (Well, at any rate, I never use it.) I > recommend that you avoid it too unless you have some very compelling > reason for turning it on. > > "set non-stop" is probably less buggy in spite of the fact that it's a > much more recent addition. (The async stuff has been in GDB since > 1999.) Still, I would think that using non-stop will turn up more bugs > in gdb than not using it. So, again, I'd suggest avoiding it at least > for the early phases of your prototype. At some point, of course, > you'll want to turn it on. Thanks Kevin. I'll try to play with "set non-stop" when I have the new code working. Oleg.