From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Aleksandar Ristovski <aristovski@qnx.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] gdbserver: Add support for Z0/Z1 packets
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200906252319.45428.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A427DAF.7010007@qnx.com>
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 20:25:35, Aleksandar Ristovski wrote:
> So, I would make it something like I proposed (if either is
> NULL, it's unsupported - also makes a clear statement to new
> target implementors).
IMO, hardly a real problem. Even if one implements both callbacks
one needs to be sure to handle e.g., one of z2 and Z2 on each
of them. It just looks unnecessary cautiousness to me. We've not
cared for that for a long while in server.c, and don't see much of
a point we have to now --- it's not like someone adding support
for inserting HW breakpoint wouldn't notice that she missed adding
support for removing it. OTOH, it makes the code a bit more tidy
to not care about it --- it's just mostly about avoiding a NULL
deference as is.
I've checked the patch in. If we need to split this up, it's
really a trivial change, so let's worry about it then, and move
on.
As for naming, thinking about the GDB side, GDB is a bit stuck to
calling everything "breakpoints" --- breakpoints, watchpoints, catchpoints,
and now tracepoints are all subsets of "breakpoints". The HPD spec,
Frysk and TotalView (well both of these are HPD influenced) at least,
call all these "actionpoints". Personally, I wish we'd call
them actionpoints too, and have "info actionpoints" show all of
those, "info breakpoints" show only breakpoints, "info watchpoints"
show only watchpoints, etc. But I'm sure it is not a practical
change at this point ( is it ?? :-) )
--
Pedro Alves
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-25 22:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-17 1:20 Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-17 1:35 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-19 7:08 ` Doug Evans
2009-06-19 13:56 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-20 22:01 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-22 19:39 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-22 22:46 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-23 15:18 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-23 15:59 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-23 16:57 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-24 18:51 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-24 19:01 ` Doug Evans
2009-06-24 19:04 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-24 19:10 ` Doug Evans
2009-06-24 19:10 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-24 19:20 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-24 19:28 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-24 19:25 ` Aleksandar Ristovski
2009-06-25 22:18 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200906252319.45428.pedro@codesourcery.com \
--to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=aristovski@qnx.com \
--cc=dje@google.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox