RFC strace via gdbserver

[Josh Stone]

On 11/09/2016 11:47 AM, Stan Cox wrote:
> 
>> Can you explain your -f changes?
>>
>> I see you're alternating QCatchSyscalls:1 or QCatchSyscalls:2 -- what
>> are these values?  Has this protocol change gone into gdb upstream, or
>> just your own gdb branch?
> Yes, it was just a local change.  QCatchSyscalls:1 was without -f being specified and QCatchSyscalls:2 was when -f was specified.  On the gdbserver side it is translated to:
>   <-2,SYSCALL1,...,SYSCALLN> follow syscalls in list
>   OR <-2,-1)  follow all syscalls
>   OR (-1) all syscalls

It's still not clear to me what it means to "follow" syscalls for :2.
Is that copying the syscall watchlist to the child?

>> have thought we just needed to add fork-events+ and vfork-events+ to our
>> qSupported string.
> Hmm yea, so add fork-events+ and vfork-events+ and just make following clones the default?

Well, these can still be dependent on the presence of -f, but yeah.

> a list of syscalls  would be $QCatchSyscalls:1;0;1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8;9;
> all syscalls would be $QCatchSyscalls:1
> 
>   That seems reasonable to me.

Great - if that works, I think it's better since nothing has to change
in the gdbserver protocol.

>> PS- on git procedure ... I'd suggest you either rebase or
>> reset and cherry-pick new changes, so we can keep it easier to see what
>> the gdbserver changes are.
> Sure thing
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
> _______________________________________________
> Strace-devel mailing list
> Strace-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
>