| To: | Hua Qin <qinhua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: kdb on SMP |
| From: | Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 26 Mar 2003 08:02:56 +1100 |
| Cc: | kdb@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:36:05 CDT." <Pine.GSO.4.10.10303250929230.23824-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | kdb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 09:36:05 -0500 (EST), Hua Qin <qinhua@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >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"? Yes. bp uses software breakpoints, changing the code. There is only one copy of the code which can be executed on any cpu. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: kdb on SMP, Hua Qin |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Backtrae before smp_init., Dong, Edie |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: kdb on SMP, Hua Qin |
| Next by Thread: | debug bpha, Hua Qin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |