From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14134 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2003 02:57:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14099 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2003 02:57:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO igw2.watson.ibm.com) (129.34.20.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 2003 02:57:38 -0000 Received: from sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com [9.2.112.57]) by igw2.watson.ibm.com (8.11.7/8.11.4) with ESMTP id h7K2tDj140034; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:55:13 -0400 Received: from kitch0.watson.ibm.com (kitch0.watson.ibm.com [9.2.224.107]) by sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id h7K2vU172770; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:57:30 -0400 Received: (from jimix@localhost) by kitch0.watson.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3p2/8.9.3/09-18-2002) id WAA45204; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 22:57:30 -0400 From: Jimi Xenidis MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16194.58265.207405.586920@kitch0.watson.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 02:57:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Andrew Cagney Subject: Re: Powerpc and software single step In-Reply-To: <20030820023005.GA1004@nevyn.them.org> References: <16185.27333.689024.383508@kitch0.watson.ibm.com> <1030819175512.ZM31220@localhost.localdomain> <20030819191300.GA24336@nevyn.them.org> <16194.42367.562777.115053@kitch0.watson.ibm.com> <20030820023005.GA1004@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00332.txt.bz2 >>>>> "DJ" == Daniel Jacobowitz writes: DJ> On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 06:32:31PM -0400, Jimi Xenidis wrote: >> This sanity check is wierd, does it expect PT_STEP to be defined _and_ >> not supported? DJ> It does happen. MIPS/Linux does that sometimes, so does anything else DJ> where PT_STEP is restricted or broken. heh, go figure. >> My first attempt was to drag ppc/rs6000 into the gdbarch world and >> drop the #defines all together. However, the test (_P) rotuine tests >> a function pointer and it was not readily apparent how to have a set >> command set a function pointer or actually run code to do so. Perhaps >> pairing it with a gdbarch boolean? DJ> I'm not sure what you mean. To quickly re-cap, I wanted to be able to switch the single step mode dynamically by creating a "set" command. Unfortunately: int gdbarch_software_single_step_p (struct gdbarch *gdbarch) { gdb_assert (gdbarch != NULL); return gdbarch->software_single_step != NULL; } I do not see a way to assign this function pointer off of the set command, unless there is a some trick I did not see. maybe we could fix this with more code, but sadly I'm limited in my ability to push out patches under the current circumstances. But all of these solutions are not the real one which probably takes more commitment then available (at least from me at the moment ;-) -JX