From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26505 invoked by alias); 10 Jul 2008 22:47:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 26483 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jul 2008 22:47:50 -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; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:47:30 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79D598416; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:47:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8011898337; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:47:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KH4v9-0005Qw-QF; Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:47:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:47:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [RFA] set/show enable-software-singlestep Message-ID: <20080710224727.GA20521@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker References: <1214331534.3601.1211.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1214862215.3601.1525.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1215657970.3549.157.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200807101207.19744.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200807101207.19744.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-07/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 12:07:19PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > I had understood the consensus was that the command would be > useful for now. > > It would be really nice if someone that had a target that > always required disabling software-singlestepping stepped forward > to add the GDB/remote smarts to do it automatically, though. ;-) I'd like to have some conclusion on how normal software single step and special software single step interact. Are all the things handled in GDB's software single step routine also the responsibility of any stub that claims single step support? Which is not how it works today - we let a powerpc gdbserver single step most things, but detect atomic sequences in the client. This avoids duplicating the logic across all stubs, but is slower. And do these special stepping types get turned off if you disable software single stepping manually? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery