From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29098 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2009 01:39:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 29084 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Sep 2009 01:39:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 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; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:39:21 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325EA10DC7; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:39:19 +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 D358210DB3; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:39:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MqGpB-0000P9-M0; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:39:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Caz Yokoyama , 'Pedro Alves' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: symbolic debug of loadable modules with kgdb light Message-ID: <20090923013917.GA974@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Caz Yokoyama , 'Pedro Alves' , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <409D09C1E1964C5EAFF5EFBAD6E936ED@xpjpn> <200905152223.58241.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090515213410.GA10064@caradoc.them.org> <8AA4B846934A4A9081F778449B96F416@xpjpn> <4A0DE914.1050800@vmware.com> <20090923004802.GA20859@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090923004802.GA20859@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2009-09/txt/msg00722.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 05:48:02PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Pedro, Daniel, or anyone with experience in remote.c, > > I'd love your feedback on this patch... Especially the part > that sends an interrupt after having established the connection > with the remote agent if the interrupt is set to BREAK+g... > See below. I have no particular comments. But it sounds like these are two orthogonal settings. > However, this being said, I really don't know about this change. > It seems to me that this part should not be controlled by the setting > that you're modifying, but by another setting. At the very least. > In fact, why do you need this at all? Can't your remote agent achieve > the same effect as you've established the connection??? Hey, that sounds familiar. You can't acheive this in an agent, because we're talking about serial consoles here - there's no other way for the agent to know there's a debugger attached. This sounds more like "set remote interrupt-sequence break-g" and "set remote interrupt-after-connection on". -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery