From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22064 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2011 14:31:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 22046 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2011 14:31:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:30:49 +0000 Received: from nat-jpt.mentorg.com ([192.94.33.2] helo=PR1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1RR2zI-0002K3-TQ from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:30:49 -0800 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([172.16.63.104]) by PR1-MAIL.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 17 Nov 2011 23:30:47 +0900 Message-ID: <4EC51A8D.8080007@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:31:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii , Luis Machado Subject: Re: [patch 5/5] Document References: <4EC20E2E.6010402@codesourcery.com> <201111161903.18043.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4EC47E7F.2090202@codesourcery.com> <201111171228.16603.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201111171228.16603.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00472.txt.bz2 On 11/17/2011 08:28 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> > +disconnects from the remote stub, pending tracepoints still exist but >> > +can not be resolved while @value{GDBN} is disconnected. > Sorry to be picky, but I'm trying to read this from a user's perspective, > and it still confuses me. What does "pending tracepoints still exist" > mean? Do you mean they still exist in GDB? That's true for all kinds > of breakpoints, so it doesn't add anything. If you mean that they exist > on the target, then what does it mean for a pending tracepoint to exist > on the target? What we're really trying to say is that pending tracepoints > don't work with disconnected tracing. How about: > I agree that "pending tracepoints still exist" is confusing, and we should remove this sentence. However, I don't think we should express "pending tracepoints don't work with disconnected tracing.", because, "pending tracepoints" and "disconnected tracing" are orthogonal to each other. A remote stub can support either/both/none of them. > The resolution of pending tracepoints requires @value{GDBN} support--- > when debugging with the remote target, and @value{GDBN} disconnects from the > remote stub (@pxref{disconnected tracing}), pending tracepoints can not be ...so I suggest remove "(@pxref{disconnected tracing})" here. What do you think? -- Yao (齐尧)