Re: GDB and new kernels

H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
20 May 1997 20:15:06 GMT

Followup to: <199705201925.PAA10124@franklin.appliedtheory.com>
By author: Benjamin Saller Bender <case@loki.appliedtheory.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Does this mean that work on CLONE_PID is abandoned? I assume we will
> need this functionality at some point , not to mention that it is suppose to
> be much more efficient.
> I honestly don't know what the future tid/pid mapping for Linux are
> expected to look like, but I expect a /proc based GDB would be a plus
> reguardless.
>

What appears to be the consensus is that with CLONE_PID, you can use
either pid's or tid's where you currently use pid's. pid's and tid's
will be allocated from the same number space. Using the pid will affect
all threads, but using the tid will affect only one thread.

There is no reason, then, ptrace() could not simply be called with the
tid.

-hpa

-- 
    PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD  1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
    See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
Always looking for a few good BOsFH.  **  Linux - the OS of global cooperation
        I am Baha'i -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/