From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>,
archer@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: gdbstub initial code, v9
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:30:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100914163001.GA591@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100914160700.GA20290@redhat.com>
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 18:07:00 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> I guess, I misunderstood the subsequent discussion as if non-stop is
> more important or preferred (I do not know how people use gdb). That
> is why I switched to non-stop.
I would find non-stop as a more general solution. In non-stop mode one still
can stop each and all the threads manually. But in all-stop mode one cannot
keep the (other) threads running.
> So, in the long term, which mode is more useful? And, I suppose that
> (unfortunately ;) ugdb should support both ?
Just people are more used to the all-stop mode and also the testsuite cases do
not expect non-stop so for the compatibility reasons (both with humans and
with the testsuite) the all-stop mode at ugdb probably makes sense.
all-stop mode could be also emulated probably from the GDB client side.
Still not suitable for some specially crafted testsuite cases but those may
not be applicable for various reasons to ugdb anyway.
Thanks,
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-14 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-08 19:22 Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 10:29 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-09-09 15:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 12:39 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2010-09-09 15:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 15:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 16:07 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2010-09-09 16:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 16:11 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-09-09 16:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 16:36 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-09-09 16:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 16:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-09 16:51 ` Tom Tromey
2010-09-10 10:12 ` Roland McGrath
2010-09-10 18:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-10 19:43 ` Tom Tromey
2010-09-10 19:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-13 5:54 ` Kevin Buettner
2010-09-14 2:20 ` Roland McGrath
2010-09-14 16:10 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-14 16:30 ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2010-09-14 21:30 ` Tom Tromey
2010-09-15 19:43 ` Kevin Buettner
2010-09-10 22:03 ` ugdb && breakpoints Oleg Nesterov
2010-09-10 22:12 ` Tom Tromey
2010-09-14 19:38 ` Roland McGrath
2010-09-14 19:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100914163001.GA591@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net \
--to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=archer@sourceware.org \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).