Hi Phil,

On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 13:06 -0500, Phil Muldoon wrote:
> Well I think in the kernel dumping core there is nothing to be done with 
> 2) other than just let it happen. I just wonder if the entry-point of 
> the program being rewritten by Frysk in this scenario will cause 
> confusion. In the case of fcore, we can always strip all this stuff 
> beforehand, dump the core, and then put it all back. But in the case of 
> gcore and google's coredumper that won't be the case. A process has no 
> idea when a userland program like gcore/fcore is creating a coredump of it.
> 
> However until there is a better place to store this stuff other than at 
> the entry-point address, then I guess the question it sort of moot.

Yes, but the breakpoints instructions themselves are stored in the
image, only the original instruction is (if we use ssol, which is almost
never at this point) (re)stored at the entry-point address. And it is
the breakpoint instructions that we don't want to have in a fcore
result. Since both you and Andrew mentioned it I added it as second
scenario to the bug report, so I won't forget to create a testcase for
that.

Cheers,

Mark