On 02/18/2015 11:42 AM, Bill Williams wrote:
> On 02/18/2015 01:37 PM, Gerard wrote:
>> Ah ok, I didn't know that.
>>
>> About how reproducible is the error, I run it three times (without the
>> change you suggested) and every time stopped at around 32000 threads.
>> Now I added appProc->continueExecution() and it happened again after
>> creating 32322 threads, so it seems this is not the problem.
>>
> Then it's got to be that somewhere in here, we're messing up internal
> stop/continue state without that propagating out to the user level.
> Debug logs will tell me something eventually...sadly, they're verbose
> and time-consuming.
>
> Which kernel version/distribution are you using, by the way?
TIDs usually wrap at 2^15, so they'll be reused in this test.
Perhaps this is confusing dyninst somewhere?
|
![[Computer Systems Lab]](http://www.cs.wisc.edu/pics/csl_logo.gif){kind=logo}