From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22065 invoked by alias); 8 Mar 2007 16:15:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 22053 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Mar 2007 16:15:50 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate5.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate5.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.154) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:15:47 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate5.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l28GFhDH327126 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 16:15:43 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l28GFhoC942324 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 17:15:43 +0100 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l28GFhog017808 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 17:15:43 +0100 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id l28GFh7E017802; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 17:15:43 +0100 Message-Id: <200703081615.l28GFh7E017802@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 8 Mar 2007 17:15:42 +0100 Subject: Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole. To: emi-suzuki@tjsys.co.jp (Emi SUZUKI) Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:15:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: drow@false.org, schwab@suse.de, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20070308.174952.189708012.emi-suzuki@tjsys.co.jp> from "Emi SUZUKI" at Mar 08, 2007 05:49:52 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 Emi Suzuki wrote: > Meanwhile the things about RS6000-AIX came to me: it does not support > hardware single stepping, so SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP_P should always > return true. My patch has nothing to concern about it... > > I have added a new file, tm-rs6000aix.h, to undef SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP_P > for only that target, but felt somewhat strange about the solution. > I feel like adding some trick for SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP_P to gdbarch.c > rather than undef'ing it, but no idea has come to mind for now. We're trying to get rid of the tm.h files, and do everything strictly via the gdbarch callbacks. (This is also necessary for multi-arch debugging.) I'd much prefer a solution that does not add new tm.h files (or contents). Why don't we extend the gdbarch_software_single_step call with a return value? Common code would call the gdbarch routine, but if it returns a nonzero value, it will fall back to using hardware single step after all. Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com