From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>,
Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>,
Tim Newsome <tim@sifive.com>, gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: gdb requires watchpoints to fire after the write
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 20:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ftywx54n.fsf@tromey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08cf0b78-0fe6-1eda-383f-7d64466d6381@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Wed, 29 Aug 2018 18:29:05 +0100")
>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
Pedro> Yeah, it's confusing.
[... great explanation ... ]
This would be great as comments in gdbarch.sh and target.h.
None of these things have comments currently.
Pedro> We could most probably streamline all of this and come up with a better
Pedro> design with some thought. See also the comment in mips-tdep.c:
Pedro> /* FIXME: cagney/2003-08-29: The macros target_have_steppable_watchpoint,
Pedro> HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT, and target_have_continuable_watchpoint
Pedro> need to all be folded into the target vector. Since they are
Pedro> being used as guards for target_stopped_by_watchpoint, why not have
Pedro> target_stopped_by_watchpoint return the type of watchpoint that the code
Pedro> is sitting on? */
Pedro> set_gdbarch_have_nonsteppable_watchpoint (gdbarch, 1);
I'm curious about why this should be in the target rather than in the
gdbarch. It seems like a property of the ISA.
Is it possible for gdbserver to do the single-step itself, avoiding a
round trip? That was the only rationale I could think of.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-29 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-28 22:08 Tim Newsome
2018-08-29 15:33 ` Simon Marchi
2018-08-29 15:47 ` Joel Brobecker
2018-08-29 15:56 ` Pedro Alves
2018-08-29 16:02 ` Simon Marchi
2018-08-29 17:29 ` Pedro Alves
2018-08-29 20:13 ` Tim Newsome
2018-08-29 20:58 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2018-08-30 8:05 ` Joel Brobecker
2018-08-31 15:37 ` Pedro Alves
2018-08-31 15:13 ` Pedro Alves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ftywx54n.fsf@tromey.com \
--to=tom@tromey.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
--cc=tim@sifive.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).