From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15285 invoked by alias); 5 Oct 2007 13:56:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 15271 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Oct 2007 13:56:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:56:43 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E652D981F4; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:56:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3C8981F1; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:56:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IdnfU-0004Xb-JU; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:56:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Remote watchpoint support for FRV Message-ID: <20071005135640.GA17031@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200710051347.l95DlrFe018076@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200710051347.l95DlrFe018076@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2007-10/txt/msg00051.txt.bz2 On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 03:47:53PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Hello, > > the tm-frv.h header file overrides a number of watchpoint related > target macros, in particular: > > #define STOPPED_BY_WATCHPOINT(W) \ > ((W).kind == TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED \ > && (W).value.sig == TARGET_SIGNAL_TRAP \ > && frv_have_stopped_data_address()) Kevin, you were the last person to work on the FRV target (far as I can tell); do you know anything about this? Ulrich, there's a third option, but I don't know if it's practical. Can we somehow specialize the remote target based on the architecture? It's not the first time I've thought it would be useful. But we already have the target adjusting the architecture and adding something in the other direction might be awkward. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery