From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>
Cc: eliz@elta.co.il, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: proposed PATCH: make watchpoints work correctly
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:37:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030529153705.GC10807@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16086.9378.401730.788367@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com>
On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:17:54AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:
>
> >> Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 16:27:33 -0400 From: Paul Koning
> >> <pkoning@equallogic.com>
> >>
> Eli> The above description made me nervous: it almost sounds like the
> Eli> current watchpoint support is pretty much dysfunctional, as most
> Eli> of the changes you suggest are not specific neither to remote.c
> Eli> nor to HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT. So could you please
> Eli> explain how, given those deficiencies, watchpoints do work for
> Eli> native targets such as x86, but did not work for your target?
> >> I'm not sure. I just built a gdb for x86 on NetBSD, and all I get
> >> is software write watchpoints, no hardware watch support seems to
> >> be present.
>
> Eli> That's strange: I thought hardware-assisted watchpoints were
> Eli> supported for all native x86 platforms. Mark, could you please
> Eli> help us out here? is NetBSD an exception?
>
> I built 5.3 for Linux and did the experiment there. Hardware
> watchpoints do work there.
>
> Eli> I don't have time right now to read the parts of breakpoint.c
> Eli> that you describe, but I promise to do that later today. Thanks
> Eli> for taking time to explain your reasoning.
>
> >> The purpose of this patch submission is to get input from experts
> >> -- not necessarily to claim that the fix I submitted is the best
> >> way to solve the problem...
>
> Eli> Certainly, I understand that. I just was surprised that your
> Eli> description of the problem was so different from my recollection
> Eli> of how watchpoints work.
>
> I just ran a small test case on the x86 Linux native build of gdb 5.3,
> and the problem (step works as if it were stepi, falsely reported as a
> watchpoint hit) occurs there as well -- just as expected.
I don't know how facile you are with expect, but could you either write
a full testcase or at least give me a small sample code and session
transcript to reduce the problem, so that this can go into the
testsuite?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-29 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-28 16:01 Paul Koning
2003-05-28 16:02 ` Paul Koning
2003-05-28 16:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-28 19:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-05-28 20:27 ` Paul Koning
2003-05-29 3:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-05-29 4:36 ` Nathan J. Williams
2003-05-29 15:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-05-29 15:17 ` Paul Koning
2003-05-29 15:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-05-29 17:41 ` Paul Koning
2003-06-02 4:19 ` Eli Zaretskii
2003-06-04 14:51 ` Paul Koning
2003-06-29 4:15 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
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=20030529153705.GC10807@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=eliz@elta.co.il \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=pkoning@equallogic.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