From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935396AbXK3RHu (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:07:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756601AbXK3RHf (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:07:35 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:56041 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758148AbXK3RHe (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:07:34 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:06:55 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Metzger, Markus T" Cc: Andi Kleen , tglx@linutronix.de, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, "Siddha, Suresh B" , Michael Kerrisk , markus.t.metzger@gmail.com, Roland McGrath Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] x86, ptrace: support for branch trace store(BTS) Message-ID: <20071130170655.GA10868@elte.hu> References: <029E5BE7F699594398CA44E3DDF5544401024075@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> <20071129155940.7df70ac2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <029E5BE7F699594398CA44E3DDF5544401051EEF@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> <200711301134.04719.ak@suse.de> <029E5BE7F699594398CA44E3DDF554440105236A@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <029E5BE7F699594398CA44E3DDF554440105236A@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Metzger, Markus T wrote: > >> Not yet. We are talking to internal teams regarding gdb support. > > > >But you already have reasonably realistic test code right? > > I wrote a small program to talk to ptrace and look at the trace of > small sample programs to test the patch. I do this on P4 32bit and > Core2 64bit. > > Our debugger team has a prototype implementation for their debugger. > But that will not be available for some time. > > I hope that we get gdb support, soon, but that would take a while if I > had to do it. i'm wondering what the main use-case would be then, and what the gdb folks think about the current API. (Roland?) Ingo