Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 12:08:57 -0700 From: Mark Peek <mark@whistle.com> To: Mark Santcroos <marks@ripe.net>, peter@wemm.org Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gdb(1) broken? Message-ID: <p05100301b7cd4bb73799@[207.76.207.129]> In-Reply-To: <20010918092248.A666@laptop.6bone.nl> References: <20010916101828.B455@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <3BA4EE76.2AED07FA@elischer.org> <20010918092248.A666@laptop.6bone.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 9:22 AM +0200 9/18/01, Mark Santcroos wrote: >Hi Peter, > >What is the state of this (for i386)? > >Mark > >On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 11:24:54AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: >> Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >> > >> > Gang, >> > >> > I don't know exactly what the gdb(1) problems on Alpha are, but we >> > do have a problem that's probably not specific to an architecture. >> > >> > The problem is basicly this: one cannot debug any programs because >> > gdb(1) gets a SIGTRAP delivered when it invokes ptrace(2) and never >> > gets a change to wait4(2) the "interior" process. >> > >> > I don't know the details, but one of the following can be the case >> > 1. We now deliver a SIGTRAP, when we didn't do so before, >> > 2. The SIGTRAP comes too quick, it should be "caught" by the wait4(2). >> > >> > I couldn't find any indication that 1 happened, so my guess is that >> > we suffer from 2. >> > >> > Is this known? >> > Any thoughts? >> >> peter has been working on this... >> > > It's because the process structure and u-area have changed entirely. I just checked in a change to fix this problem (sys/kern/sys_process.c v1.71). The KSE changes caused the trace information to be put into the debug process state instead of the traced process. Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05100301b7cd4bb73799>