From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20452 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2011 17:36:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 20247 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2011 17:36:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:36:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p0THa7HS024890 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:36:07 -0500 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0THa4fG022651 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:36:06 -0500 Received: from host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0THa43k024957; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:36:04 +0100 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p0THa38E024956; Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:36:03 +0100 Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 00:32:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] hw watchpoints across fork() + multi-inf Message-ID: <20110129173602.GA23720@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20101206111135.GA27176@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201012172124.41900.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201012172124.41900.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00562.txt.bz2 On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 22:24:41 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 06 December 2010 11:11:35, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > this is an Archer branch > > archer-jankratochvil-watchpoint3 > > being posted here since 2007 and (different impl.) present in Fedora: > > [patch] Fix disarmed hw watchpoints after inferior's fork() > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-10/msg00367.html [...] > I'm trying to look at this series, and it looks like how gdbserver > has been made to support watchpoints was overlooked, My per-TID implementation was posted in 2007. I have even updated it according to the review but it got unreplied (I did not ping it, though). Doug Evan's multi-inferior implementation was posted first in 2009: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-04/msg00804.html If we want to start talking about "overlooking" it happened the opposite way. I do not mind wrt the patch, but I do not agree with your wording. > - gdbserver already has a per-process structure for the debug registers, > yet, your implementation is different, which makes it gratuitously harder > to share and move code between the gdb and gdbserver implementations. > > (FYI, we've written patches that move shareable bits of > gdb and gdbserver into common/, seeding the way to such duplication > removal. we should be posting them in the foreseeable future) What is the status of these existing common/ unifications? Considering syncing back linux-nat to gdbserver (as Doug did not post it as a two pieces series - (1) sync gdbserver to linux-nat (2) extend it in gdbserver) first as a base for this patchset. But I may create by such linux-nat sync something already obsoleted by your existing non-public patches. Thanks, Jan