|
From: <man...@ve...> - 2004-02-06 08:53:31
|
Thanks for the replies !!! I will consider these options.
Thanks,
Mani.
"Nicholas
Nethercote" To: Manikandan X.
<nj...@ca...> Shanmugam/EMPL/India/Verizon@VZNotes
Sent by: cc: val...@li...
"Nicholas Subject: Re: [Valgrind-users] Attaching a process with
Nethercote" valgrind using process id
<nj...@he...m
.ac.uk>
02/06/04 01:36 PM
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 man...@ve... wrote:
> * Attach a process id with valgrind, i know it is not
possible,
> just confirming it.
Correct, you cannot do it. Valgrind has to gain control at startup. If
it didn't, then eg. Memcheck wouldn't be able to work, because it couldn't
know what memory had been allocated so far, etc.
> * I have a scenario where, we have a system monitor which
> starts/initializes/monitors all the other core processes. These core
> processes cannot be started alone. They are tightly coupled with system
> monitor. Is there any way, i will be able to individually attach valgrind
> to the core process without attaching to the system monitor. I know of
the
> --trace-children option, this is not suited for our system, since it
spawns
> lot of processes in the order of hundreds.
When the system monitor spawns the core processes, can you exec them with
"valgrind x" instead of "x"?
N
|