From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12198 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2008 22:18:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 12181 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Dec 2008 22:18:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:17:46 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA36C10DE7; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 22:17:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8826210CD3; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 22:17:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L7H5K-0006aS-R4; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:17:42 -0500 Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:18:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Snyder Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Pedro Alves , dgraham@nortel.com Subject: Re: RFC: Do not try g-packet-guess algorithm on exited targets Message-ID: <20081201221742.GA24261@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Pedro Alves , dgraham@nortel.com References: <20081123211454.GA17391@caradoc.them.org> <49346036.6060204@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49346036.6060204@vmware.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: 2008-12/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2 On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 02:07:50PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> We got a bug report indicating that gdbserver --multi didn't work on >> MIPS. We'd connect to the target, try to read the XML description - >> gdbserver reports an error because there's no process yet - and then >> try to guess the description from the g packet length instead. Of >> course we can't do that; there's no process yet. >> >> This patch fixes the problem. We try qXfer on connection, then try >> 'g' only if (A) there was no XML description, and (B) there is a >> running process, and (C) we are not in non-stop mode; assume that >> non-stop targets can provide a description explicitly. > > Just curious -- how do you determine whether or not there is > a running process? We send out a "?" and see what we get back. If there's a process, it's a stop reply; if there's nothing, we get the exit status of the last process. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery