From: Jimi Xenidis <jimix@watson.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>,
Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>,
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Powerpc and software single step
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 13:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16198.6133.411978.563514@kitch0.watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3F4440F0.30007@redhat.com>
>>>>> "AC" == Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> writes:
AC> It may be possible to wrap software single step's predicate in a
AC> function that, like the remote protocol, returns the predicate, or
AC> always false.
>>
>> It is my understanding that the predicate is use to conditionally wrap
>> the "vector" is it usefull for the predicate to be anything more then
>> a boolean in gdbarch?
AC> Sorry, I don't understand your question.
Ok, its probably my lingo shortcommings.
the ppc trees still use the olf MACROS:
SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP_P (the predicate?)
SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP (the function which is the gdbarch "vector")
since the eval of the predicate is checked before the function is
called I opted to toy with the predicate in is macro form to decide
its value. Unfortunately in gdbarch land the predicate
simply tests for the vector being !=NULL.
So my quiestion is really about introducing a boolean to gdbarch that
can changed by some user action (such as set). But if it is the "test
then call" itself that you are objecting to then obviously this will
not solve that.
-JX
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-22 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-12 22:31 Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-19 17:55 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-08-19 19:05 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-19 19:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-19 22:32 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-20 2:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-20 2:57 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-20 3:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-20 3:21 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-20 13:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-20 13:54 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-20 15:51 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-08-20 16:02 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-21 3:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-08-22 13:17 ` Jimi Xenidis [this message]
2003-08-22 15:54 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-08-22 17:32 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-08-22 18:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-09-08 18:58 ` Patch to eliminate SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP from ppc Was: " Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-08 19:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-09-08 20:17 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-08 20:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-09-08 21:22 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-08 22:01 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-09-09 10:30 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-09 15:30 ` AHAH! " Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-09 16:15 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-09-09 17:01 ` Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-09 17:55 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-09-09 22:01 ` PATCH: Re: AHAH! Re: Patch to eliminate SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP Jimi Xenidis
2003-09-10 1:24 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-10-10 2:40 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-08-20 2:30 ` Powerpc and software single step Andrew Cagney
2003-08-20 2:33 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-08-21 14:01 ` Andrew Cagney
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=16198.6133.411978.563514@kitch0.watson.ibm.com \
--to=jimix@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kevinb@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