Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-25 Thread Sushanth Rai
--- On Sat, 3/24/12, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > No, I mentioned exactly this in paragraph you replied to. > To actually start executing from runq, thread needs to > transition > from kernel to userspace (in other words, thread appears on > runq > due to interrupt, thus entering kernel space)

Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-24 Thread Konstantin Belousov
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:52:29AM -0700, Sushanth Rai wrote: > > > --- On Fri, 3/23/12, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > Can we > > > safely remove them out of the runq ? > > No, since thread on runq shall be considered the same as the > > thread > > actually executing on CPU. It is unsafe to

Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-24 Thread Sushanth Rai
--- On Fri, 3/23/12, Konstantin Belousov wrote: Can we > > safely remove them out of the runq ? > No, since thread on runq shall be considered the same as the > thread > actually executing on CPU. It is unsafe to suspend the > thread in this > state, due to it potentially owning a kernel resou

Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-23 Thread Konstantin Belousov
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:35:17AM -0700, Sushanth Rai wrote: > What I mean by inconsistent is that, a process with lots of threads > takes a while before all threads are suspended. When I look at the > resulting core file, the state of some of the shared data is not > exactly what I was expecting

Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-23 Thread Sushanth Rai
x27;m running on 7.2. Cursory look at trunk version didn't show major changes in this area. Thanks, Sushanth --- On Thu, 3/22/12, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > From: Konstantin Belousov > Subject: Re: Improving gcore > To: "Sushanth Rai" > Cc: freebsd-hackers@free

Re: Improving gcore

2012-03-22 Thread Konstantin Belousov
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 04:35:13PM -0700, Sushanth Rai wrote: > Sometimes I have trouble capturing the "correct" state of a > multithreaded process using gcore. That is, it looks like target > process might have done some work since the time command was issued > and the core file was generated. > >

Improving gcore

2012-03-21 Thread Sushanth Rai
Sometimes I have trouble capturing the "correct" state of a multithreaded process using gcore. That is, it looks like target process might have done some work since the time command was issued and the core file was generated. Looking at the code, gcore calls ptrace(PT_ATTACH...), which internall