Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] range stepping: gdb
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 10:23:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5193621C.50603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83k3n173ao.fsf@gnu.org>

On 05/14/2013 08:46 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
>> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 20:10:47 +0100
>>
>> When user issues the "step" command on the following line of source,
>>
>>    a = b + c + d * e - a;
>>
>> GDB single-steps every single instruction until the program reaches a
>> new different line.
> 
> I always thought that GDB sets a temporary breakpoint at the end, and
> then lets the target run freely.  Why not?

Because we don't know whether there are instructions in the line that
jump/branch to a different place.  We'd miss the breakpoint and lose
control.

> 
>> +@var{end} is the address of the first instruction beyond the step
>> +range, and @strong{not} the address of the last instruction within it.
>> +(This has the property that @var{start} == @var{end} single-steps
>> +once, and only once, even if the instruction at @var{start} jumps to
>> +@var{end}.)
> 
> This sentence in parentheses got me completely confused.  Before
> reading it, I thought I understood what is this about; now I don't.
> In particular, if START is equal to END, then how in the world could
> the instruction at START jump to END?

Sorry, I had that typo in the gdbserver code as well, fixed it
there, but missed this one.

It should read, even if the instruction at @var{start} jumps to @var{start}.

vCont;r first steps, then checks.  IOW:

 vCont ;r ADDR1,ADDR1

is equivalent to (and could be thought to supersede):

 vCont ;s

> And if END is excluded from the
> range, then why when START equals END do we step at all?  Please
> explain.

It's just a design decision.  I recall at least one target I saw I worked
with that supported range stepping, and it didn't even a distinction
between range vs no-range step commands.  The way to do a single step
was to pass both addresses the same.  I find it a better design than
requiring the target do one current-address check _before_ stepping,
and another _after_ single-stepping.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2013-05-15 10:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-14 19:10 [PATCH 0/5 V3] target-assisted range stepping Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 4/5] range stepping: gdbserver (x86 GNU/Linux) Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:47   ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-14 20:14   ` Tom Tromey
2013-05-23 17:44     ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-24 11:33       ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-15 12:14   ` Yao Qi
2013-05-20 18:01     ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-23  0:56   ` Yao Qi
2013-05-23 17:26     ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 2/5] Convert rs->support_vCont_t to a struct Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:40   ` Tom Tromey
2013-05-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 1/5] Factor out in-stepping-range checks Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:37   ` Tom Tromey
2013-05-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 3/5] range stepping: gdb Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:46   ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-15 10:23     ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2013-05-15 11:22       ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-15 12:39         ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-15 13:46           ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-15 13:58             ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-15 18:20               ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-16  6:08                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-20 18:43                   ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-20 19:05                     ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-05-23  0:47                     ` Yao Qi
2013-05-23 17:22                       ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-14 19:11 ` [PATCH 5/5] range stepping: tests Pedro Alves
2013-05-22 14:32   ` Yao Qi
2013-05-23 17:34     ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-23 18:03     ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-24  2:27       ` Yao Qi
2013-05-24  9:45         ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-24  9:57           ` Yao Qi
2013-05-14 20:21 ` [PATCH 0/5 V3] target-assisted range stepping Tom Tromey
2013-05-23 17:44   ` Pedro Alves
2013-05-23  1:02 ` Yao Qi
2013-05-23 17:46   ` Pedro Alves

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5193621C.50603@redhat.com \
    --to=palves@redhat.com \
    --cc=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox