From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 7Lu+DtGw5mNGeS8AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:02:09 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2E5791E221; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:02:09 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=F7y3QNvD; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC60A1E0D3 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:02:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EAB63853567 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:02:08 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5EAB63853567 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1676062928; bh=x2MFgSLYM36K4lULV3uJKTlN5A7Z8YmGLey4cSlN3Bw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=F7y3QNvDD6xF2sFwlrFj8+nGAVrR4Cwcjp/laAvURfKDFGIELu5fiTl77KSlxYrFz nX8+T3n9doA6c6ZwodvolQkbtf72EJ4/Awk9Q/W02NvRz/kzQmXgv8pymaJT2ME38K iLu9Z/nipM4d0KvHaai83QNIlpTeMwbwvLxBfhT0= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0DEE3858414 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:01:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E0DEE3858414 Received: from [172.16.0.192] (192-222-180-24.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.180.24]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FE071E0D3; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:01:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4768292e-1d5a-b7f1-6b06-9ead20542cdc@simark.ca> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 16:01:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] gdbserver/linux-aarch64: When thread stops, update its target description Content-Language: fr To: Thiago Jung Bauermann , Tom Tromey Cc: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches , Luis Machado , Pedro Alves , Andrew Burgess References: <20230130044518.3322695-1-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> <20230130044518.3322695-5-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> <87pmattzjw.fsf@redhat.com> <7970ac03-1123-d5f6-7b17-808832d43be6@simark.ca> <9a85e2fe-078a-e2ee-7e49-53fe0ceef492@arm.com> <87y1pgaib6.fsf@linaro.org> <3f4e3603-59e3-a896-72e4-d692646c4e44@palves.net> <87v8kd9odi.fsf@linaro.org> <87cz6i2o6x.fsf@linaro.org> <9864aa2b-f3cc-94ae-0785-5565cc990006@arm.com> <87sffdy32p.fsf@tromey.com> <874jrt2zzt.fsf@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <874jrt2zzt.fsf@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2/10/23 12:26, Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gdb-patches wrote: > > Tom Tromey writes: > >> Luis> I'd be happy with an intermediate solution like what Thiago put >> Luis> together. It would solve a long-standing issue for SVE and >> Luis> gdbserver and it seems simpler at this point, plus Thiago already >> Luis> put the effort to write the code. >> >> I haven't followed this discussion, but with the remote protocol, >> whatever we do now will be baked in forever. So, it's worth spending >> extra time up front to get a really solid approach. (I'm not saying >> this isn't, just pointing out that there's a long-term cost.) > > Andrew recommended adding a new feature to the qSupported packet so it > would be an optional extension of the remote protocol — not really baked > into it but rather a complementary muffin. > > Per-thread target descriptions are also a very generic feature that > I can see being useful for heterogeneous computers, though I don't know > if there's any actual interest in that in the context of GDB and the > remote protocol. Maybe Pedro will correct me but... for ROCm, it's possible we'll want to support remote debugging in the future. And our model is a mix of host and GPU threads in a single inferior. So I can see this feature being useful for that. Simon