From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19771 invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2012 15:47:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 19732 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Nov 2012 15:46:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL 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, 29 Nov 2012 15:46:48 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Te6K6-0005Vl-Rm from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:46:46 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.96.206]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:46:46 -0800 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-02.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.96.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:46:45 -0800 Message-ID: <50B7834B.3060508@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:47:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120911 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: Marc Khouzam , "'dje@google.com'" , "'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> <20604.20455.105300.495734@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> <509167D4.20007@redhat.com> <5091C0B0.5000508@codesourcery.com> <50AE6FCC.4020205@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <50AE6FCC.4020205@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed 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: 2012-11/txt/msg00869.txt.bz2 On 11/23/2012 02:32 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > What about the case of connecting to a target that is tracing, after > disconnected tracing? Do we already tell the frontend somehow which > tracepoints are active on the target? Should tracepoints have an > "installed on target" field? > > Yao Qi wrote: >> >On 11/01/2012 03:09 AM, Marc Khouzam wrote: >>> >>Now that GDB pushes new tracepoints to the target immediately, that >>> >>use-case may not apply, but I wonder if there are other situations >>> >>where some tracepoints will be on the target and other will not? >> > >> >Yes, the pending tracepoints won't be downloaded after tracing is started until they are resolved. The notification is required for this case. > Ok. If the answer to my question above is yes, it might be this > notification ends up unnecessary in favor of a generic > =breakpoint-modified. Pedro, to make sure I don't misread your comments, I'd like to ask are you suggesting that we can add an 'installed on target' field for tracepoint in '=breakpoint-modified' notification? -- Yao (齐尧)