From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29005 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2003 08:50:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28996 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2003 08:50:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO miranda.se.axis.com) (193.13.178.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Oct 2003 08:50:27 -0000 Received: from axis.com (ironmaiden.se.axis.com [10.13.8.120]) by miranda.se.axis.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian) with ESMTP id h988oPd0016430 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 2003 10:50:25 +0200 Message-ID: <3F83CFD1.8010002@axis.com> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 08:50:00 -0000 From: Orjan Friberg Organization: Axis Communications User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Display of read/access watchpoints when HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00200.txt.bz2 Hi all, I'm working on a gdb port for a remote target that has hardware watchpoint support. I have defined HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT, to make gdb disable the watchpoint and single-step over it when it's hit. The basic stuff works fine; the problem I have is the displaying of "Old value/New value" when a read or access watchpoint is hit. (Normal write watchpoints are displayed correctly.) The problem seems to be that target_stopped_data_address () is called in bp_stop_status () *after* the single-step over the disabled breakpoint has been carried out, at which point the target is no longer stopped due to a hardware watchpoint (but due to the single-step). Consequently, target_stopped_data_address () returns 0, and gdb thinks that the watchpoint didn't hit. I can't see that any other targets keep the last "stopped data address" until the next hardware watchpoint is hit (which would make the address still available after the single-step). Any suggestions as to what I might have missed, or any insight in how it's supposed to work would be appreciated. Thanks, Orjan -- Orjan Friberg Axis Communications