From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8062 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2005 12:48:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 8049 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2005 12:48:07 -0000 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.195) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:48:07 +0000 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id n1so1577205nzf for ; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:48:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.224.48 with SMTP id w48mr2844906nzg; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:48:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.31.6 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:48:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 12:48:00 -0000 From: Donny Kurniawan To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: libGDB and gdbserver questions MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00294.txt.bz2 Hello, I am trying to write a remote debugger for multiple processes. As far as I know, most of the parallel debuggers (that use GDB as the backend), use multiple instances of GDB, where each instance controls one process. The problem is: I want to be able to handle a lot of processes (1000 processes is the minimum), clearly having 1000 instances of GDB controlling 1000 processes is not very scalable, and it will choke the "master UI controller" (that controls GDBs). I've been thinking about 2 solutions: (1) gdbserver Since one gdbserver requires one instance of GDB, my plan is to use gdbserver as the low-level debugging engine and extend GDB to be able to handle multiple connections from gdbserver (correct me if I'm being too simplistic). Is there a support for it in GDB? (2) libGDB Actually, what's the state of libGDB (v. 2)? Not much docs that I can find, only http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/papers/libgdb2/ and the source code. Is it going to be more suitable to address the problem mentioned above. Any pointers/directions/opinions are appreciated... I tried googling and looking at the mailing list, but the minimum requirement to be able to handle 1000 procs makes the problem unusual. Thank you, Donny