This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: Actual support for tracing forks on GNU/Linux
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, msnyder at redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 12:34:44 -0400
- Subject: Re: RFA: Actual support for tracing forks on GNU/Linux
- References: <20030618232942.GA982@nevyn.them.org>
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 07:29:42PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> This patch enables "catch fork" and "set follow-fork-mode child" for fork().
>
> Other things from my working directory that doesn't include:
> - vfork support - I'll do that separately once this in
> - exec support - the code is still a mess
> - exit event support - i.e. stopping the process just before it exits,
> to take a look around - this confuses GDB very badly
> - gdbserver support for any of the above
> - enabling the testsuite checks for this - even worse of a mess
> I hope to get at least native vfork support into GDB 6.0.
>
> This patch works by adding a hook every time we attach to an LWP or fork a
> new LWP, to set tracing flags on it. We enable event reporting for fork()
> [which requires ~ 2.5.34 kernel; I heard that one of RH's backport kernels
> included this, but I don't know if it still does.] Then, when we get a
> fork, we end up attached to both parent and child. We remove breakpoints in
> whichever one we don't care about, and then we detach it.
>
> This both lets us choose which one to trace, and also fixes the problem
> where breakpoints would be left in the inferior after it forked, causing the
> child to die with SIGTRAP.
>
> I had to override kill_inferior, for an issue discovered in testing: when
> we're stopped with both processes attached, we have to make sure to kill
> them both. We have to deal with this because the user could "catch fork",
> and when they see the fork decide which one to debug.
>
> I think that's everything. I'd like at least a nod from the threading
> maintainers, since I had to hook into lin-lwp.c. OK?
Ping?
> 2003-06-18 Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
>
> * config/i386/nm-linux.h (LINUX_CHILD_POST_STARTUP_INFERIOR): Define.
> * config/nm-linux.h (linux_enable_event_reporting)
> (linux_handle_extended_wait, linux_child_post_startup_inferior): New
> prototypes.
> (CHILD_POST_STARTUP_INFERIOR, CHILD_POST_ATTACH, CHILD_FOLLOW_FORK)
> (KILL_INFERIOR): Define.
> * i386-linux-nat.c (child_post_startup_inferior): New function.
> * i386-nat.c (child_post_startup_inferior): Wrap in #ifdef.
> * infptrace.c (kill_inferior): Wrap in #ifdef.
> * lin-lwp.c (lin_lwp_attach_lwp): Call child_post_attach after
> attaching to each LWP.
> (child_wait, lin_lwp_wait): Call linux_handle_extended_wait.
> (init_lin_lwp_ops): Fill in some more operations.
> * linux-nat.c (linux_enable_event_reporting): New function.
> (child_post_attach, linux_child_post_startup_inferior)
> (child_post_startup_inferior, child_follow_fork)
> (linux_handle_extended_wait, kill_inferior): New functions.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer