From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14721 invoked by alias); 24 Dec 2010 02:50:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 14713 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Dec 2010 02:50:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Dec 2010 02:50:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FABD2BAB4B; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:50:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id QjG8bkNXgG58; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:50:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DFB2BAB30; Thu, 23 Dec 2010 21:50:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 053311457B3; Fri, 24 Dec 2010 03:50:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 05:10:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Thiago Jung Bauermann , Jan Kratochvil , Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] Implement support for PowerPC BookE ranged watchpoints Message-ID: <20101224025034.GX2596@adacore.com> References: <1290549100.3164.47.camel@hactar> <201011271747.39053.pedro@codesourcery.com> <1293130182.14239.21.camel@hactar> <201012232017.11120.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201012232017.11120.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-12/txt/msg00448.txt.bz2 > The resource accounting bits, I still say that they should all just > go away (at some point), and gdb should just try to insert the > watchpoint immediately, and see if the target refuses. E.g., how could > one sanely implement the accounting for remote targets? The target > is free to do all sorts of smart merging, and resource reusing, and > in fact, x86 gdbserver does so (which is why the x86 and most > other ports don't actually make use of the resource accounting > interfaces, they just always accept watchpoints). This sounds like a great idea to me! And Thank You, Pedro, for handling this series of patches. You are much more thorough and knowledgeable in that area than I could ever be. Congrats to Thiago for seeing this through... -- Joel