From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17654 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2009 21:10:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 17639 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2009 21:10:30 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.115.85.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:10:24 +0000 Received: from mailhost2.vmware.com (mailhost2.vmware.com [10.16.67.167]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909F73C007; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:10:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.94.141] (msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com [10.20.94.141]) by mailhost2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76EAF8E574; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:10:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AA96ACE.5030900@vmware.com> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:10:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder CC: Vladimir Prus , "gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com" , "jakob@virtutech.com" Subject: Re: GDB MI Reverse Commands added [1 of 3] References: <00ce01ca265a$ccb66ca0$662345e0$@com> <4A95E670.9040402@vmware.com> <4AA96A81.90302@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <4AA96A81.90302@vmware.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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, Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00286.txt.bz2 Oh, excuse me, reading email out of date order. I see the questions have been answered. Please disregard. ;-) Michael Snyder wrote: > Maybe these questions were intended for Jakob? > > > > Vladimir Prus wrote: >> Michael Snyder wrote: >> >>> Index: mi-main.c >>> =================================================================== >>> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/mi/mi-main.c,v >>> retrieving revision 1.156 >>> diff -u -p -r1.156 mi-main.c >>> --- mi-main.c 2 Jul 2009 17:25:59 -0000 1.156 >>> +++ mi-main.c 27 Aug 2009 01:45:23 -0000 >>> @@ -88,8 +88,8 @@ static void mi_cmd_execute (struct mi_pa >>> >>> static void mi_execute_cli_command (const char *cmd, int args_p, >>> const char *args); >>> -static void mi_execute_async_cli_command (char *cli_command, >>> - char **argv, int argc); >>> +static void mi_execute_async_cli_command (char *cli_command, >>> + char **argv, int argc); >>> static int register_changed_p (int regnum, struct regcache *, >>> struct regcache *); >>> static void get_register (struct frame_info *, int regnum, int format); >>> @@ -119,35 +119,50 @@ void >>> mi_cmd_exec_next (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> - mi_execute_async_cli_command ("next", argv, argc); >>> + if (argc > 0 && strcmp(argv[0], "--reverse") == 0) >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("reverse-next", argv + 1, argc - 1); >>> + else >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("next", argv, argc); >>> } >>> >>> void >>> mi_cmd_exec_next_instruction (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> - mi_execute_async_cli_command ("nexti", argv, argc); >>> + if (argc > 0 && strcmp(argv[0], "--reverse") == 0) >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("reverse-nexti", argv + 1, argc - 1); >>> + else >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("nexti", argv, argc); >>> } >>> >>> void >>> mi_cmd_exec_step (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> - mi_execute_async_cli_command ("step", argv, argc); >>> + if (argc > 0 && strcmp(argv[0], "--reverse") == 0) >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("reverse-step", argv + 1, argc - 1); >>> + else >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("step", argv, argc); >>> } >>> >>> void >>> mi_cmd_exec_step_instruction (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> - mi_execute_async_cli_command ("stepi", argv, argc); >>> + if (argc > 0 && strcmp(argv[0], "--reverse") == 0) >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("reverse-stepi", argv + 1, argc - 1); >>> + else >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("stepi", argv, argc); >>> } >>> >>> void >>> mi_cmd_exec_finish (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> - mi_execute_async_cli_command ("finish", argv, argc); >>> + if (argc > 0 && strcmp(argv[0], "--reverse") == 0) >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("reverse-finish", argv + 1, argc - 1); >>> + else >>> + mi_execute_async_cli_command ("finish", argv, argc); >>> } >> What will happen if MI client does not pass --reverse, but >> execution_direction is set to reverse via CLI? It seems that this will execute >> finish in reverse? I think this is not desirable -- rather -exec-finish >> should always be forward. On the other hand, this is something that >> I probably can fix as a follow-up patch, somewhere in MI core. >> >>> void >>> @@ -175,7 +190,7 @@ mi_cmd_exec_jump (char *args, char **arg >>> /* FIXME: Should call a libgdb function, not a cli wrapper. */ >>> return mi_execute_async_cli_command ("jump", argv, argc); >>> } >>> - >>> + >> Stray whitespace change. The patch has a few of those, I imagine >> that whoever ends up applying the patch to CVS once the copyright >> assignment is sorted can undo this damage. >> >>> static int >>> proceed_thread_callback (struct thread_info *thread, void *arg) >>> { >>> @@ -193,8 +208,8 @@ proceed_thread_callback (struct thread_i >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -void >>> -mi_cmd_exec_continue (char *command, char **argv, int argc) >>> +static void >>> +exec_continue (char **argv, int argc) >>> { >>> if (argc == 0) >>> continue_1 (0); >>> @@ -212,10 +227,50 @@ mi_cmd_exec_continue (char *command, cha >>> >>> old_chain = make_cleanup_restore_current_thread (); >>> iterate_over_threads (proceed_thread_callback, &pid); >>> - do_cleanups (old_chain); >>> + do_cleanups (old_chain); >>> } >>> else >>> - error ("Usage: -exec-continue [--all|--thread-group id]"); >>> + error ("Usage: -exec-continue [--reverse] [--all|--thread-group id]"); >>> +} >>> + >>> +/* continue in reverse direction: >>> + XXX: code duplicated from reverse.c */ >>> + >>> +static void >>> +exec_direction_default (void *notused) >>> +{ >>> + /* Return execution direction to default state. */ >>> + execution_direction = EXEC_FORWARD; >>> +} >>> + >>> +static void >>> +exec_reverse_continue (char **argv, int argc) >>> +{ >>> + enum exec_direction_kind dir = execution_direction; >>> + struct cleanup *old_chain; >>> + >>> + if (dir == EXEC_ERROR) >>> + error (_("Target %s does not support this command."), target_shortname); >>> + >>> + if (dir == EXEC_REVERSE) >>> + error (_("Already in reverse mode.")); >>> + >>> + if (!target_can_execute_reverse) >>> + error (_("Target %s does not support this command."), target_shortname); >>> + >>> + old_chain = make_cleanup (exec_direction_default, NULL); >>> + execution_direction = EXEC_REVERSE; >>> + exec_continue (argv, argc); >>> + do_cleanups (old_chain); >>> +} >> Why is this code "duplicated from reverse.c"? In other words, cannot >> mi_cmd_exec_continue call 'reverse_continue'? If this is not possible, >> there should be a comment explaining why. >> >> Otherwise, this is OK. Thanks! >> >> - Volodya >> >> >> >