From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15087 invoked by alias); 13 May 2010 17:17:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 15073 invoked by uid 48); 13 May 2010 17:17:41 -0000 Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 17:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100513171741.15072.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "pedro at codesourcery dot com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20100507183730.11580.k04jg02@gmail.com> References: <20100507183730.11580.k04jg02@gmail.com> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug threads/11580] scheduler-locking breaks re-runs X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-q2/txt/msg00260.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From pedro at codesourcery dot com 2010-05-13 17:17 ------- Yes, though command proliferation whenever we need a new flag, is probably not that great, and is limited, e.g., expression evaluation (infcalls) may need locking as well (for p, x, and others). HPD's (and TotalView's) ptsets handle that nicely, IMO, with syntax that allows scoping a command to a thread process, or thread group. We have some work in that direction implemented in the old multiprocess branch in cvs, in the form of itsets (inferior thread sets). Unfortunately, that never made it to completion. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11580 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.