Re: [RFA] set/show enable-software-singlestep

[Pedro Alves <pedro_alves@portugalmail.pt>]

A Tuesday 24 June 2008 19:18:54, Michael Snyder wrote:
> There may be cases where gdb would be inclined to use
> software singlestep, but you might not want it to.  Examples:

I understand you want this for reverse debugging, so let me ask:

>  * "target remote" to a target such as a simulator that
>    would be able to support normal singlestep.

Should the support be reported by the stub instead?, as in:

Can the target (stub/debug api) do single-stepping?  Yes, cool.
No?  Bummer, will have to do software-singlestepping
on the GDB's side.

E.g, another similar issue with displaced stepping:
(hey you just touched that option :-) )

I'm working with a target that supports stepping 
off breakpoints on the stub side.  I was thinking of:

  Can the target (stub/debug api) step over breakpoints for me?
  Yes, cool.  No?  Bummer, will have to do displaced-stepping
  on the GDB's side.

>  * reverse debugging, where you can't predict the
>    "come-from" address of a jump instruction.

Should software-singlestepping *always* be disabled
while doing a reverse debug?  If so, why do we need the
command?  Shouldn't it be enforced in the code?

-- 
Pedro Alves