This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Towards multiprocess GDB


Michael Snyder wrote:
Yarg. I can imagine wanting to debug several core files at once
(failure of a multi-process application, maybe), but mixed core
files and live processes? I think maybe we should disallow that...
What would happen when you said "continue"?
In practice, I think there are going to be nonsensical combinations, but we can just exclude them as they come up. For a first version it seems reasonable to only work if all the arguments use the same target, and then allow more variation once Pedro implements the multi-target capability he described. :-) If targets are per-program, then "all continue" could be quite a circus - no effect on cores, ptrace calls to local inferiors, and a spray of packets to remote targets, which are fortunately async, so they don't mind getting an extra continue packet or two. :-)
How about this as a first increment? Could we extend
what we now have with forks, so that GDB could individually
control the separate process ids (including threads, if they
have them), while forestalling dealing with separate symbol
files because forks can all share the same one?
I want to jump on symbol files quickly, because I think it may be the long pole - I hope not, but we don't know for sure yet, lots of old code with old assumptions. Our clientele is mainly interested in embedded (more protocol and gdbserver hackery, whee), so native fork support seems most likely as either testing support or a volunteer contribution.

Stan


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]