From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Cc: jjohnstn@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC]: x86 threaded watchpoint support [1/3]
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 22:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040611224559.GA10014@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200406112200.i5BM0JBA000385@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>
On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 12:00:19AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:14:24 -0400
> From: Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
>
> The following patch gets threaded watchpoint support working for
> the x86. On x86 linux, the dr_status register is thread-specific.
> This means that the current method which uses the PID to call
> PTRACE is wrong. I have changed this to use the current lwp for
> the inferior_ptid. Corresponding to this, the
> i386_stopped_data_address function switches the inferior_ptid to
> the trap_ptid. Thus, we can see if we really stopped for a
> watchpoint or hardware breakpoint.
>
> I'm not surprised that the current stuff is wrong. However, have you
> verified that the dr_status register is thread-specific for *all*
> versions of GNU/Linux that we support and not just the RedHat kernel
> that you're working with?
I'm pretty sure - GNU/Linux has never had a concept of "process
registers", since threads have evolved from processes rather than the
other way around.
> Because the thread-db.c code changes the trap_ptid into a
> high-level ptid (pid + tid), I had to add a new target vector
> interface which gives back the lwp for a given ptid. This is used
> by the low level dr get routine.
>
> Really? Doesn't TIDGET work for you?
TIDGET at this point is the thread ID, i.e. internal state from NPTL or
LinuxThreads. It's not the LWP id that we need in order to all ptrace.
It sounds like this new vector is really the death blow to thread-db.c.
Maybe I should see how much of it we can throw away. Copious free time
and all that.
> Index: lin-lwp.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/lin-lwp.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.55
> diff -u -p -r1.55 lin-lwp.c
> --- lin-lwp.c 25 May 2004 14:58:28 -0000 1.55
> +++ lin-lwp.c 11 Jun 2004 20:55:28 -0000
> @@ -1200,21 +1200,29 @@ child_wait (ptid_t ptid, struct target_w
> }
>
> /* Handle GNU/Linux's extended waitstatus for trace events. */
> - if (pid != -1 && WIFSTOPPED (status) && WSTOPSIG (status) == SIGTRAP
> - && status >> 16 != 0)
> + if (pid != -1 && WIFSTOPPED (status) && WSTOPSIG (status) == SIGTRAP)
> {
> - linux_handle_extended_wait (pid, status, ourstatus);
> + /* Set trap_ptid like lin_lwp_wait does. This is needed
> + for watchpoint support. For example, the x86 linux
> + watchpoints need to know what thread an event occurred
> + on so as to read the correct thread-specific status. */
> + trap_ptid = pid_to_ptid (pid);
>
> - /* If we see a clone event, detach the child, and don't
> - report the event. It would be nice to offer some way to
> - switch into a non-thread-db based threaded mode at this
> - point. */
> - if (ourstatus->kind == TARGET_WAITKIND_SPURIOUS)
> + if (status >> 16 != 0)
>
> What's this shift supposed to do?
This one's my fault so I'll answer for him: it was already there, up a
couple lines in the diff. It's for the extended waitstatus support.
I must say that I'm not thrilled by having trap_ptid leak out into yet
more files. It's an extremely underspecified interface.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-11 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-11 21:14 Jeff Johnston
2004-06-11 22:00 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-06-11 22:46 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2004-06-12 17:12 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-06-14 18:28 ` Jeff Johnston
2004-06-12 9:35 ` Eli Zaretskii
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=20040611224559.GA10014@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jjohnstn@redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
/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