This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB-Guile vs. libgc 7.4 marker threads
- From: Andy Wingo <wingo at pobox dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: ludo at gnu dot org (Ludovic CourtÃs), xdje42 at gmail dot com, tillmann at selfnet dot de, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 09:46:04 +0200
- Subject: Re: GDB-Guile vs. libgc 7.4 marker threads
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <a3c401a4a9dd02c97721c4ef99a7e652 at wh-stuttgart dot net> <CAP9bCMTjnYu_d2H0SbpHp+TqvEBYxsyXZXi2Zj6iJLwTzrO58A at mail dot gmail dot com> <f30b0b3709471cf98cf4c7a2454e9043 at wh-stuttgart dot net> <83ha54zrry dot fsf at gnu dot org> <CAP9bCMRfSeONscGbWyfYmyW6CkSJv-f4MhU6iACKQwukvS7oZQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <87wqdr1l61 dot fsf_-_ at gnu dot org> <83lhu7t8u9 dot fsf at gnu dot org>
On Mon 12 May 2014 15:39, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-commits/2014-04/msg00051.html
>> Probably the GC_MARKERS hack linked above should be applied to GDB as
>> well. WDYT?
>
> If we are sure this solves the problem, IMO yes. But it would be nice
> to try to have a new libgc release that is free from this problem, if
> possible. Also, maybe we should document in the same comment what, if
> anything, does this restriction mean for GDB-Guile users.
I have asked for a new libgc release, but I have not gotten a response.
I will ask again.
Setting GC_MARKERS=1 is not visible to the user. There is no change in
functionality. Using multiple mark threads is purely an optimization.
So I don't think it needs to be documented.
Regards,
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/