From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29826 invoked by alias); 10 Jul 2008 13:26:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 29804 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jul 2008 13:26:07 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,J_CHICKENPOX_39,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; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:25:46 +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 m6ADPhXi011463 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:25:43 -0400 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 m6ADPgKR017727; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:25:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn-6-29.fab.redhat.com [10.33.6.29]) by pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6ADPfWL008255; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 09:25:42 -0400 Message-ID: <48760DD4.8060207@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:26:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rick Moseley CC: frysk Subject: Re: Changes References: <1215663421.5233.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4875A151.1000200@redhat.com> <48760B1E.3060709@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <48760B1E.3060709@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; 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-q3/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 Rick Moseley wrote: >> >> Ditto. I will bring it up again when the time is right. >> >> > Agreed too. The ability to catch a task as it is abnormally > terminating and bring up the debugger is a powerful thing IMHO. I > don't see any need here to involve another app(Systemtap has been > mentioned) to perform this feature. I don't remember this being too > difficult in Frysk(although I am not the one that implemented it.) > The (three) Frysk state machines are what catches that, and that is a considerable amount of complex code. Modelling a thread is delicate, complex and very fuzzy. Take a look at LinuxWaitBuilder and how it has to do backflips to catch out of order wait notifications. But I think the issue is not catching a thread as it spawns another - we will have to have that. That's in the goals. Follow fork, follow clone - these are a intrinsic to the scalability goal of working with many threads (imho ;)) It's all the other always-on, low-cost monitoring goals that Systemtap do now I think are being excluded. Regards Phil