Re: Does multi-exec make sense without target-async?

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Wednesday 20 April 2011 19:35:26, Marc Khouzam wrote:

> There is no point in running multi-exec without
> target-async on, right?
> 
> I mean, if I have two inferiors and I run one,
> there is no way for me to tell GDB to also
> run the second one?  To do that, I have to 
> interrupt the first to get the prompt.
> I originally thought of using 'continue -a'
> to resume all inferiors, but the -a flag
> is only for non-stop it seems.

Yeah, GDB's internal all-stop model is not a good
fit for multi-process.  You either resume just
all threads of a process, or all threads of all
processes.  It's controlled by this setting in all-stop mode:

(gdb) help set schedule-multiple 
Set mode for resuming threads of all processes.
When on, execution commands (such as 'continue' or 'next') resume all
threads of all processes.  When off (which is the default), execution
commands only resume the threads of the current process.  The set of
threads that are resumed is further refined by the scheduler-locking
mode (see help set scheduler-locking).

Note, the setting applies to _all_ execution commands, like
scheduler-locking.

-- 
Pedro Alves