From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5811 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2013 16:53:41 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 5802 invoked by uid 89); 23 Apr 2013 16:53:41 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 16:53:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r3NGrbuT029996 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:53:38 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r3NGraE9012496; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:53:37 -0400 Message-ID: <5176BC90.7050102@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 04:36:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lgustavo@codesourcery.com CC: "'gdb-patches@sourceware.org'" Subject: Re: [PATCH, ppc] Fix hw *points for embedded ppc in a threaded environment References: <516EC58C.5060501@codesourcery.com> <51755821.8020907@codesourcery.com> <51755A5F.3060009@redhat.com> <51756D2B.5050204@redhat.com> <51758960.2090702@redhat.com> <51768D08.4090709@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <51768D08.4090709@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00712.txt.bz2 Whoops, looks like I forgot to paste this bit of the reply into the other mail. On 04/23/2013 02:30 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > On 04/22/2013 09:02 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> I hacked GDB some more, and I have further insight. >> GDB _is_ to blame. Updated GDB/test hack patch at the bottom. > >> So GDB is to blame. Fixing this, however, would be a different >> story, and doesn't look that simple. I found a PR already covering this, btw. breakpoints/10116. > The question here is how many threads we should spawn. I went with 10 since that is often greater than the number of hardware watchpoints in a target. Sounds fine to me. -- Pedro Alves