Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: "Philippe Waroquiers" <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>,
	"Yao Qi" <yao@codesourcery.com>, "Tom Tromey" <tromey@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver)
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 15:15:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201106011615.03444.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1A6A06B5CD4346FEB0EAE0998527F07D@soleil>

On Tuesday 31 May 2011 19:06:17, Philippe Waroquiers wrote:
> 
> > If that was the only problem, than it'd be okay --- the user just
> > shouldn't use the command then.  GDB will just do what the
> > user told it to.  But, it looks like the patch changes the
> > behavior _even_ if the user doesn't use the command.
> 
> Effectively, the patch changes the behaviour (but I believe in a more
> consistent way). But if that is considered as not good, I can change
> the patch so as to keep by default the old behaviour.

Thinking more about this, I agree.  The current default is
making it so that e.g., a single watchpoint on

 char s16[16];

is a sofware watchpoint against x86 gdbserver, but
it's a hardware watchpoint against native x86 gdb.  gdbserver
knows how to make that a hardware watchpoint, but gdb
is not giving it a chance --- the current default assumes you
can only set a hardware  watchpoint on a single word, but that's
not true on x86 gdbserver, given that the target knows to use
more than one debug register for a single watchpoint
if necessary.

> Note that one other thing that I find confusing in the current behaviour
> is that if you have a certain set of hw watchpoints that were accepted
> and you add a new one, you might obtain an error back referencing
> an "old" accepted watchpoint.
> 
> I think it would be better if the watchpoints would always be re-inserted
> by gdb in the same order.

I suppose that if we made insert_breakpoint_locations
walk breakpoints by increasing number instead of walking by
breakpoint locations, it'd be good enough.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-01 15:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-21 22:20 Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-26 19:02 ` Tom Tromey
2011-05-29 13:01   ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-30 15:26     ` Joel Brobecker
2011-05-31 19:07     ` x86 watchpoints bug (Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver)) Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 20:25       ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 20:53         ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 21:29       ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 22:15         ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 23:04           ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-01 14:35             ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-08 22:55               ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-06-09  0:00                 ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-09 22:16                   ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-07-21 17:20                     ` Pedro Alves
2011-07-22 16:40                       ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-07-22 16:43                         ` Pedro Alves
2011-07-23 16:28                           ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-07-26 20:02                             ` software watchpoints bug (was: Re: x86 watchpoints bug) Pedro Alves
2011-07-27  3:45                               ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-07-22 17:19                         ` x86 watchpoints bug (Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver)) Pedro Alves
2011-05-27  3:25 ` ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver) Yao Qi
2011-05-27 17:53   ` Tom Tromey
2011-05-27 17:59     ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-30  4:06       ` Yao Qi
2011-05-30  5:34         ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-30  5:48           ` Yao Qi
2011-05-30  6:31             ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 17:31         ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 18:06           ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-06-01 15:15             ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-06-05 20:55               ` Philippe Waroquiers

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=201106011615.03444.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be \
    --cc=tromey@redhat.com \
    --cc=yao@codesourcery.com \
    /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