From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4622 invoked by alias); 29 May 2003 03:27:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4580 invoked from network); 29 May 2003 03:27:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gandalf.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.22) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 May 2003 03:27:34 -0000 Received: from zaretsky (tony08-232-64.inter.net.il [80.230.232.64] (may be forged)) by gandalf.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.3-GR) with ESMTP id ASQ61789; Thu, 29 May 2003 06:27:25 +0300 (IDT) Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 03:27:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: pkoning@equallogic.com Message-Id: <5567-Thu29May2003062838+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <16085.7093.776115.863795@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> (message from Paul Koning on Wed, 28 May 2003 16:27:33 -0400) Subject: Re: proposed PATCH: make watchpoints work correctly Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <16084.56661.295275.544414@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> <1659-Wed28May2003225524+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <16085.7093.776115.863795@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00523.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 16:27:33 -0400 > From: Paul Koning > > Eli> The above description made me nervous: it almost sounds like the > Eli> current watchpoint support is pretty much dysfunctional, as most > Eli> of the changes you suggest are not specific neither to remote.c > Eli> nor to HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT. So could you please > Eli> explain how, given those deficiencies, watchpoints do work for > Eli> native targets such as x86, but did not work for your target? > > I'm not sure. I just built a gdb for x86 on NetBSD, and all I get is > software write watchpoints, no hardware watch support seems to be > present. That's strange: I thought hardware-assisted watchpoints were supported for all native x86 platforms. Mark, could you please help us out here? is NetBSD an exception? I don't have time right now to read the parts of breakpoint.c that you describe, but I promise to do that later today. Thanks for taking time to explain your reasoning. > The purpose of this patch submission is to > get input from experts -- not necessarily to claim that the fix I > submitted is the best way to solve the problem... Certainly, I understand that. I just was surprised that your description of the problem was so different from my recollection of how watchpoints work.