From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30487 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2003 15:14:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 30478 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2003 15:14:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Apr 2003 15:14:15 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA29800024; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 11:14:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3E9D7346.4040006@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:14:00 -0000 From: "J. Johnston" Organization: Red Hat Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: prev_pc problem on ia64 References: <3E973FEB.1090500@redhat.com> <16027.6227.694651.833559@localhost.redhat.com> <3E9C8262.8070401@redhat.com> <3E9C9E1B.4040400@redhat.com> <16028.46200.713351.766037@localhost.redhat.com> <3E9CB85B.5000308@redhat.com> <3E9CCB50.5000908@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00160.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: >>> >>> > I tried to use target_has_execution but that did not work. The error >>> > I get is that the process does not exist. The read_pc() routine >>> for the ia64 is doing >>> > a read_register_pid() and it appears that the inferior_ptid is not >>> set up >>> > at a time when target_has_execution is set to true. >>> >>> target_has_execution doesn't mean that the target is executing. It is >>> a total misnomer to indicate that the gdb target stratum is capable of >>> execution. I think what you want is target_has_registers. >> > > >> Arrrgh! That problem, core file's also has registers ... so right >> theory, I've no idea on which thing to use in the test though. > > > Hmm, ... but at least target_has_registers should only be true when the > target really does have the registers available. I guess try it. > Didn't work. Still get the message: reading register psr (#332): No such process. Should the inferior_ptid be valid at the point that target_has_registers is true? -- Jeff J.