This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch v6 21/21] record-btrace: add (reverse-)stepping support
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 13:37:59 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch v6 21/21] record-btrace: add (reverse-)stepping support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1379676639-31802-1-git-send-email-markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com> <1379676639-31802-22-git-send-email-markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com> <20131006195158 dot GF28020 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B230AA11A0D at IRSMSX104 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com>
On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 14:48:29 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
> > I would see it worth a comment even in
> > (gdb) help record btrace
> > Start branch trace recording.
>
> I don't think that this is necessary or helpful. If we start documenting the
> trace size here, we should also say that trace is collected per thread with
> no correlation between threads and that tracing induces a run-time overhead
> and that it may also affect thread interleaving which may cause bug symptoms
> to disappear, and ....
Tom for example recently added a TODO item to fix it all in general:
https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ProjectIdeas?action=diff&rev1=57&rev2=58
More text is better than less text. But I do not insist on that.
Thanks,
Jan