[Top] [All Lists]

Re: kdb on SMP

To: Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: kdb on SMP
From: Hua Qin <qinhua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:36:05 -0500 (EST)
Cc: kdb@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <27517.1048347022@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: kdb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

I have to go back to "bp" and "bpa".
You said "bp" and "bpa" are same. Meaning  the current "bp" is a  global
breakpoint for all cpus?

I did some tests, set a break point on cpu 4 by using "bp", then "go".
later, when the break point were hit, it was on cpu 3. 

Is that correct way for "bp"?

On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Keith Owens wrote:

> On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 09:25:43 -0500 (EST), 
> Hua Qin <qinhua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >So "bpa" will have the same problem? 
> bp and bpa are the same for software breakpoints.
> >How about "bph" and "bpha", since they are
> >using Pentium debug registers other that int3 mechanism, they don't have
> >these problem.
> bpha installs the hardware breakpoint on all cpus, bph only installs on
> one cpu but is not much use when you do not know which cpu you will be
> executing on.
> The current kdb code for handling two cpus dropping into kdb at the
> same time has races.  Sonic Zhang mailed some test patches recently,
> see ftp://oss.sgi.com//projects/kdb/download/v4.0/kdb-smphdr*.  I have
> not had time to try them yet.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>