From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFC: A mode in which gdb avoids libthread_db
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 20:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1030728205348.ZM4739@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> "RFC: A mode in which gdb avoids libthread_db" (Jul 26, 11:58am)
On Jul 26, 11:58am, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> Recent Linux kernels (2.5.30 and later; theoretically the latest Red Hat
> 2.4.20 kernels also include it, but I observed some badness in testing...)
> support some ptrace extensions I designed which make it possible to debug
> multi-threaded applications without using libthread_db at all. The only
> things we'll lose are:
> - Potential high-level information, like mutex status - right now we
> don't have this at all on GNU/Linux.
> - TLS access - this could be easily fixed by handling each platform's
> TLS ABI directly from GDB, and there's a comment to that effect in
> GDB's source already.
> - TIDs - we'd only have the application's LWP IDs, not the thread IDs
> that LinuxThreads/NPTL use.
>
> Things we'll gain:
> - A lot of libthread_db-related bugs would go away. For instance,
> the kfail in print-threads.exp, which hits a breakpoint after
> LinuxThreads decides the thread has already exited.
> - ABI simplicity - this would solve the x86-64/i386 issue, and similar
> problems on MIPS.
> - Support for debugging clone-based 1-1 threading which doesn't use
> libpthread.so.
>
> Once the pending fork-debugging patch is accepted, most of the machinery
> we'd need to do it will be in place, too. Thoughts? Worthwhile?
As a settable mode, this definitely sounds worthwhile.
Kevin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-28 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-26 15:58 Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-26 23:29 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-07-26 23:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-08 2:21 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-28 20:53 ` Kevin Buettner [this message]
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=1030728205348.ZM4739@localhost.localdomain \
--to=kevinb@redhat.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/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).