Re: [PATCH] Add autoload-breakpoints [3/7] ReportAsync-doc

[Hui Zhu <hui_zhu@mentor.com>]

On 03/21/12 01:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 21:25:07 +0800
>> From: Hui Zhu<hui_zhu@mentor.com>
>> CC:<gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,<stan_shebs@mentor.com>
>>
>>>> +The @value{GDBN} remote serial protocol includes @dfn{reportasync},
>>>> +packets that the stub can report status or do an operation in any time.
>>>
>>> I don't understand the "do an operation in any time" part.  What does
>>> it mean in practice?
>>
>> It is means that after gdb connected with the stub, the stub can report
>> when the inferior is running and GDB is waiting it, or inferior is
>> stoped and GDB just control it.
>> It make the stub can report the status for any time.
>
> You mean, as in "asynchronously"?

Yes, that is my mean.

>
>>> And I don't understand what you mean by "needs to be handled as a
>>> simple packet".  If that's a reference to something discussed earlier
>>> in the manual, please add here a cross-reference to that part.
>>
>> That means when the stub send a shake hands package ^ and wait the
>> reply, if it got a package that is not ^.  Then the shake hands is fail.
>>    It need give up this shake hands and begin to handle this packet that
>> it just get.
>> For example:
>> Stub send a ^ to GDB.  It readchar, and got a $.  It should not drop
>> this $, After that, it will got "c#csum".  It need handle the package
>> "$c#csum".
>
> I still don't understand why you used the word "simple".  "Simple" as
> opposed to what other packet handling?

Maybe "normal" is better. "Normal" as opposed to reportasync packets.

>
>>>    After the handshake, the stub can send @samp{reportasync} packets to
>>>    @value{GDBN}, using the same packet format as in simple remote serial
>>>    protocol.
>>>
>>> Is this only for the failed handshake?  If so, perhaps we need to tell
>>> what happens when the handshake succeeds.
>>
>> No, this is for success.
>
> The problem here is that you again used "simple protocol", and before
> that you mentioned "simple packet" when the handshake failed.
>
> So this again boils down to the same question: why do you use the word
> "simple" in this context?

Yes, it looks really odd even if change it to normal.  That is because 
after shakes mode, the packet will use the normal format in 
http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb/Overview.html.
The only different is:
If the shake hands mode fail, the packet will from GDB to the stub.
If the shake hands mode success, the packet will from the stub to GDB.

Thanks,
Hui