* Proposed remote protocol addition: vCont
@ 2003-10-01 14:41 Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-10-08 19:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-10-01 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
After long discussion, I would like to propose this addition to the remote
protocol. It specifies a more thread-aware syntax for resuming the
inferior, allowing an arbitrary combination of stepped, signalled, resumed,
and frozen threads. This does _not_ obsolete the existing c/C/s/S packets;
the parser for this packet is larger than some hand-coded stubs.
Here's the documentation:
`v' -- verbose packet prefix
Packets starting with `v' are identified by a multi-letter name,
up to the first `;' or `?' (or the end of the packet).
`vCont'[;ACTION[`:'TID]]... -- extended resume
Resume the inferior. Different actions may be specified for each
thread. If an action is specified with no TID, then it is applied
to any threads that don't have a specific action specified; if no
default action is specified than other threads should remain
stopped. Specifyin multiple default actions is an error;
specifying no actions is also an error. Thread IDs are specified
in hexadecimal. Currently supported actions are:
`c'
Continue
`CSIG'
Continue with signal SIG
`s'
Step
`SSIG'
Step with signal SIG
The optional ADDR argument normally associated with these packets
is not supported in `vCont'.
Reply: *Note Stop Reply Packets::, for the reply specifications.
`vCont?' -- extended resume query
Query support for the `vCont' packet.
Reply:
``vCont'[;ACTION]...'
The `vCont' packet is supported. Each ACTION is a supported
command in the `vCont' packet.
`'
The `vCont' packet is not supported.
[By the way, I just discovered that the file-IO protocol is not
threading-friendly; but that's an unlikely combination anyway, and not hard
to fix.]
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Proposed remote protocol addition: vCont
2003-10-01 14:41 Proposed remote protocol addition: vCont Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2003-10-08 19:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-10-08 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 10:41:40AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> After long discussion, I would like to propose this addition to the remote
> protocol. It specifies a more thread-aware syntax for resuming the
> inferior, allowing an arbitrary combination of stepped, signalled, resumed,
> and frozen threads. This does _not_ obsolete the existing c/C/s/S packets;
> the parser for this packet is larger than some hand-coded stubs.
>
> Here's the documentation:
>
> `v' -- verbose packet prefix
> Packets starting with `v' are identified by a multi-letter name,
> up to the first `;' or `?' (or the end of the packet).
>
> `vCont'[;ACTION[`:'TID]]... -- extended resume
> Resume the inferior. Different actions may be specified for each
> thread. If an action is specified with no TID, then it is applied
> to any threads that don't have a specific action specified; if no
> default action is specified than other threads should remain
> stopped. Specifyin multiple default actions is an error;
> specifying no actions is also an error. Thread IDs are specified
> in hexadecimal. Currently supported actions are:
>
> `c'
> Continue
>
> `CSIG'
> Continue with signal SIG
>
> `s'
> Step
>
> `SSIG'
> Step with signal SIG
>
> The optional ADDR argument normally associated with these packets
> is not supported in `vCont'.
>
> Reply: *Note Stop Reply Packets::, for the reply specifications.
>
> `vCont?' -- extended resume query
> Query support for the `vCont' packet.
>
> Reply:
> ``vCont'[;ACTION]...'
> The `vCont' packet is supported. Each ACTION is a supported
> command in the `vCont' packet.
>
> `'
> The `vCont' packet is not supported.
>
>
>
> [By the way, I just discovered that the file-IO protocol is not
> threading-friendly; but that's an unlikely combination anyway, and not hard
> to fix.]
There were no objections (Jim gave me some helpful minor edits for the
documentation, though).
Andrew, were the remote.c parts of the patch OK now that the protocol
is settled?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-08 19:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-10-01 14:41 Proposed remote protocol addition: vCont Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-10-08 19:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).