From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4985 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2008 16:11:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 4972 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Feb 2008 16:11:59 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:11:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1QGBcp9029321; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:11:38 -0500 Received: from pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (pobox-2.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m1QGBcc1017136; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:11:38 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn-6-15.fab.redhat.com [10.33.6.15]) by pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m1QGBaDT015612; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:11:37 -0500 Message-ID: <47C43A38.4030407@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:11:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Wielaard CC: Frysk Hackers Subject: Re: Watchpoint prorogation to child threads References: <47C42CA3.1030003@redhat.com> <1204041610.3487.62.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> In-Reply-To: <1204041610.3487.62.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 172.16.52.254 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q1/txt/msg00077.txt.bz2 Mark Wielaard wrote: > > It would be nice if this is similar to the breakpoints. Low-level > breakpoints are the same on a clone (because they are really just > markers in the code segment which is the same), but they are cleared on > exec (because then the memory of the process is reset). > > I'm not sure I understand, are breakpoints propagated on clone or not? I think they should, and I think I agree on the similarity. To be honest, not thought about the exec issue, but yeah I guess the memory is reset. Regards Phil