From: Keith Seitz <kseitz@firetalk.com>
To: Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>
Cc: insight@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: I'm down to minor quibbles...
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 06:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <39ABBCC0.8F212EFB@firetalk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20000828160957.A1569@visi.com>
Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> The 28-August-2000 snapshot with my recent patches seems to
> work pretty well (well enough to hand over to the applications
> development guys). I've noticed a couple minor things:
>
> 1) With the Linux/i586/native target, when I stop execution in
> a routine for which the source file is unavailable, it
> displays dissassembled instructions in the source window.
>
> The same situation with the RDI target displays "Unable
> Read Instructions at 0xXXXX" in the source window.
>
> This isn't a big deal, but it seems odd.
This probably has something to do with how gdb disassembles memory.
Normally, when not attached to a target, gdb "disassembles" from the
executable. When attached to a target, it usually disassembles directly
from the target's memory. I seem to recall that Insight was changed to
NOT disassemble from the target at all (or only at specific times?). I
wonder if there is some discrepency with the LMA and VMA?
> 2) While the RDI target is executing, the status line
> continues to display status of "Program stopped at..."
>
> It would be nice if the status line changed to "Program
> running" or something similar.
This typically happens when the target code in gdb does not set
inferior_pid. The actual test to determine if a target is running is in
gdbtk-cmds.c's gdb_target_has_execution. The test checks: inferior_pid
!= 0 && target_has_execution. One of these is not set properly. I
noticed this, too, recently and was going to change it to just check
inferior_pid, exactly the same test that kill_command in inflow.c does.
(Anyone have any comments on this? When I originally wrote
gdb_target_has_execution, I "copied" the test from kill_command. Since
that's changed, I recommend we change it to follow the current
kill_command.)
I'll bet that it works just fine if you take out the "&&
target_has_execution" part of the test.
Keith
next parent reply other threads:[~2000-08-29 6:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20000828160957.A1569@visi.com>
2000-08-29 6:38 ` Keith Seitz [this message]
[not found] ` <39BE9BF2.3DEAFD32@cygnus.com>
[not found] ` <20000912161733.B30377@visi.com>
[not found] ` <39BEA0C8.B76866A4@cygnus.com>
2000-09-12 14:35 ` Grant Edwards
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=39ABBCC0.8F212EFB@firetalk.com \
--to=kseitz@firetalk.com \
--cc=grante@visi.com \
--cc=insight@sources.redhat.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).