From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25753 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2007 02:43:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 25742 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2007 02:43:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:43:23 +0000 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d32so5855122pye for ; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:43:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.35.26.14 with SMTP id d14mr214767pyj.1195094594520; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:43:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.35.69.5 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:43:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:43:00 -0000 From: "Robert Bu" To: msnyder@specifix.com Subject: Re: It takes a long time to disassemble some instructions for remote target Cc: gdb@sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2 -----Original Message----- From: Michael Snyder Sent: 2007-11-14 19:44 > On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 16:39 +0800, Robert Bu wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> When I try to disassemble a range of instructions, for example from >> PC1 to PC2, GDB tries to fetch and disassemble the instructions one by >> one. This may not be a problem for native debugging, or for remote >> debugging with high connection speed. However, it takes some long time >> for a not so fast serial connection, since GDB fetches one instruction >> at a time, which results in a lot of 'm' packets. >> Is that possible for GDB to fetch all instructions back for one time >> with just one(maybe more than one, but now a lot of) 'm' packet, and >> disassemble them locally one by one? > > My friend, I have just the thing you need! > It slices! It dices! It prevents gdb from > needlessly fetching memory from text sections! > > All ya gotta do is type "set trust-readonly"! > And if ya don't trust me (but who am I kidding, > EVERYBODY trusts a carny!), you can just type > "help set trust-readonly" and read all about it > yourself! > Yes, this is a workaround for read-only section. However, it does not work for self-modifying code. Thanks anyway. Robert.