From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@redhat.com>
To: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
Cc: frysk <frysk@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: frysk.proc.{ptrace,corefile} -> frysk.proc.{live,dead}
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:08:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <467149C9.8050509@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1181815036.4474.23.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org>
Mark,
Good questions. The key difference is that a dead system has no state
(well, ok, only one) where as a live system is statefull and
consequently, a dead system has no reason to implement or handle
abstract methods such as sendrecContinue et.al where as a live system
does. Over time we'll accumulate other "live" hosts - utrace, remote,
and then when we've a problem, we'll with new information available,
likely review how to better break down the "live" case.
This further refinement, and introduction of frysk.proc.live.LiveTask
lets us finish the refactoring task I started of separating out specific
implementations of a Host (corefile, ptrace) from the abstract model.
For instance, those state variables in frysk.proc.Task and corresponding
methods can be localized to frysk.proc.live.
Andrew
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 09:12 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>> This picks up an earlier refactoring, where the specific instances of a
>> Host et.al. were moved to sub-packages. As I noted back then, the
>> sub-package names, in hindsite, weren't the best choice - reflecting
>> implementation (using ptrace) rather than properties (live or dead).
>>
>> The intent is to rename frysk.proc.{ptrace,corefile} ->
>> frysk.proc.{live,dead}
>>
>
> Could you explain a bit more what kind of public interface (differences)
> you see between these two packages? How would it compare with the public
> frysk.proc interface for Tasks?
>
> My feeling is that it isn't a good idea to just rename the
> implementation packages ptrace, corefile to these properties you find
> more appealing. You should layer the properties on top of the
> implementation techniques.
>
> There might be more implementations later like utrace and/or some
> userspace /proc implementation layered on top of utrace that Chris is
> working on. But we will still use ptrace for systems that don't support
> utrace (yet). And with some magic we can probably give the core file
> implementation some of the live properties by emulating memory, register
> access and instruction stepping. So multiple implementations might map
> to different instances of these properties.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-14 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-13 13:17 Andrew Cagney
2007-06-14 10:11 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-14 14:08 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2007-06-15 9:05 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-15 15:04 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-15 19:44 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-18 18:15 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-18 19:06 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-18 23:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-19 8:59 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-19 22:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-20 9:21 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-19 8:32 ` Andrew Cagney
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=467149C9.8050509@redhat.com \
--to=cagney@redhat.com \
--cc=frysk@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark@klomp.org \
/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).