Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:34:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201112122030.25365.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111212183734.GA24356@host2.jankratochvil.net>

Thanks again for the test.

I'm wondering why bother to mask out DR_STATUS bits instead
of clearing all of it.  I mean, when we set a watchpoint, we're
already clobbering the whole of DR_CONTROL, with

  i386_dr_low.set_control (new_state->dr_control_mirror);

so it seems there's no point in trying to retain all the other
bits of DR_STATUS.  If we set a watchpoint, any change the
inferior had done itself to the debug registers is thrown
out the window.

If I change amd64_linux_prepare_to_resume to look like:

static void
amd64_linux_prepare_to_resume (struct lwp_info *lwp)
{
  int clear_status = 0;

  if (lwp->arch_private->debug_registers_changed)
    {
      struct i386_debug_reg_state *state = i386_debug_reg_state ();
      int i;

      for (i = DR_FIRSTADDR; i <= DR_LASTADDR; i++)
	if (state->dr_ref_count[i] > 0)
	  {
	    amd64_linux_dr_set (lwp->ptid, i, state->dr_mirror[i]);

	    /* Only a sanity check for leftover bits (set possibly
	       only by inferior).  */
	    clear_status = 1;
	  }

      amd64_linux_dr_set (lwp->ptid, DR_CONTROL, state->dr_control_mirror);

      lwp->arch_private->debug_registers_changed = 0;
    }

  if (clear_status || lwp->stopped_by_watchpoint)
    amd64_linux_dr_set (lwp->ptid, DR_STATUS, 0);
}

(the `clear_status' bits are new) then the new test passes.

I'm doing a full run with this now.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-12-12 20:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-05 16:46 Pedro Alves
2011-12-05 17:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-09 16:30   ` New tests to watch regions larger than a machine word (Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode) Pedro Alves
2011-12-09 19:11     ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-13 16:12       ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-05 21:24 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-09 16:45   ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-09 16:47     ` Tristan Gingold
2011-12-09 19:23     ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-12-13 16:26       ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-11 23:39     ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 11:53       ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-12 14:49         ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12  0:14     ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 17:23       ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-12 18:38         ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:14           ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:30             ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 17:24               ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 18:49                 ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 19:25                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-16 16:16                     ` Pedro Alves
2012-01-20 19:51                       ` testsuite: native/non-extended/extended modes [Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode] Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-20 19:53                         ` Pedro Alves
2012-01-20 19:57                           ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-12 20:34             ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-12-12 21:39               ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 16:21                 ` Fix PR remote/13492 (Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode) Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 17:23                   ` Fix PR remote/13492 Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 16:33                 ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Pedro Alves
2011-12-13 18:57                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-14 17:35                     ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-14 17:42                       ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-15  8:48                         ` Regression for T (Stopped) processes [Re: [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode] Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-15 12:44                           ` Pedro Alves
2011-12-15 15:33                             ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-12-13 22:27                   ` [PATCH] PR threads/10729: x86 hw watchpoints and non-stop mode Jan Kratochvil

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=201112122030.25365.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.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