From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12804 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2012 17:47:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 12794 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Sep 2012 17:47:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:47:00 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8SHkxOM014675 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:46:59 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8SHkwjR014993; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:46:58 -0400 Message-ID: <5065E292.4000606@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:47:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120911 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] new tracepoint downloaded MI notification. References: <1348793347-12556-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1348793347-12556-3-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <5065E1E9.5040204@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5065E1E9.5040204@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-09/txt/msg00689.txt.bz2 On 09/28/2012 06:44 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 09/28/2012 01:49 AM, Yao Qi wrote: >> +@item =tracepoint-downloaded,id="@var{number}",address="@var{addr}" >> +Reports that a tracepoint was downloaded to target. The @var{number} >> +is the ordinal number of the tracepoint. The @var{addr} is the >> +address where tracepoint was downloaded. > > The "address where tracepoint was downloaded" makes me think this > returns the address in gdbserver's memory that holds the tracepoint > object. But it's not, it's the tracepoint's address, as in the > address the tracepoint is set at in the inferior. > > Took me a second to recall, but the reason the address is > necessary is multi-location tracepoints -- a tracepoint on the > target is identified by the { number, address } tuple. We don't > send over the location's sub number (like 1.1, 1.2, etc.). > > Should we mention this somewhere (other than at the tracepoint > packets description), so frontend people don't wonder whether they > can ignore the address field, and why aren't the other fields of > the tracepoint (like spec string) included? And I guess the related question is, are frontends interested in { number, address }, which is target side detail, or on { number, location number }, which is how other breakpoints are presented to the frontend? I would think the latter? -- Pedro Alves