This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 17/17] infrun: scheduler-locking reverse


> From: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
> CC: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>, "gdb-patches@sourceware.org"
> 	<gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 08:47:28 +0000
> 
> > off     == no locking (threads may preempt at any time)\n\
> > on      == full locking (no thread except the current thread may run)\n\
> > step    == scheduler locked during stepping commands (step, next, stepi,
> > nexti).\n\
> > reverse == scheduler locked during reverse/replay execution.\n\
> > 
> > to:
> > 
> > off     == no locking (threads may preempt at any time)\n\
> > on      == full locking (no thread except the current thread may run)\n\
> >            This applies to both normal and reverse/replay execution.\n\
> > step    == scheduler locked during stepping commands (step, next, stepi,
> > nexti).\n\
> >            This applies to both normal and reverse/replay execution.\n\
> > reverse == scheduler fully locked only during reverse/replay execution.\n\
> > 
> > And even gdb.texinfo somehow accordingly.
> 
> Fine with me.  Eli, are you OK with the wording?
> 
> I already changed "reverse" into "replay" as discussed in a parallel thread.

Assuming the "reverse" value above will become "replay", yes, I'm fine
with this wording.

> I'm also using the terms "replay mode" and "record mode".  I'm fine to change
> them back into "reverse/replay execution" and "normal execution", which might
> be clearer if you have not read the Record manual section.

"Record mode" and "replay mode" are fine with me.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]