From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12780 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2010 19:24:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 12771 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Sep 2010 19:24:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 19:24:00 -0000 From: Oleg Nesterov To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" Cc: Jan Kratochvil , utrace-devel@redhat.com, archer@sourceware.org Subject: Re: gdbstub initial code, v8 Message-ID: <20100908192124.GB27120@redhat.com> References: <20100903224047.GA8917@redhat.com> <20100905194101.GA31584@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100906181808.GA22839@redhat.com> <20100906183142.GA3256@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100906204446.GA29925@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SW-Source: 2010-q3/txt/msg00157.txt.bz2 On 09/06, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > Oleg Nesterov writes: > > > [...] > >> Therefore until you track some ugdb-specific software(*) > >> breakpoints ugdb does not need to support Z0 IMO. I guess ugdb > >> will never have to support these: thread-related(?) and tracepoint > >> ones. > > > Good! I thought ugdb should somehow handle this all "transparently" > > for gdb. I thought (I don't know why) that writing "int 3" from gdb > > side should be avoided in favour of some "better" method unknown to me. > > Please note that last year's gdbstub prototype used kernel uprobes as > an optional gdb breakpoint implementation (i.e., a backend for the Z > packets). When/if the lkml uprobes patches actually get merged, ugdb > should also use them. Yes, agreed. Oleg.