Re: Hardware watchpoint for read

["Philippe Waroquiers" <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>]

>> what are the performance penalties of having a watchpoint on a memory
>> location in the state of the art x86 processor. Because it might be
>> implemented with a parallel circuitry in the processor, my guess is
>> that it could be cheap.
> 
> Do you mean a hardware watchpoint? It's hard to say for sure without 
> looking at the processors inner workings, but the penalty is probably 
> very small.
> 
> When the conditions are satisfied, a TRAP will be generated and it will 
> get through to the debugger via the kernel.
> 
> Suppose we issue a continue command... For the debugger, the inferior 
> will run uninterrupted while the hardware watchpoint is active.
> 
> This is not the case with software watchpoints, as the debugger will be 
> constantly touching the inferior while it runs.
Which makes software watchpoints extremely slow, while hardware
watchpoints have limitations (e.g. in nr or size).
Note that the Valgrind gdbserver (in 3.7.0) provides "unlimited simulated
hw watchpoints" : these are slower than real hw watchpoints, but "only"
suffer from the Valgrind slowdown.

Philippe