From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 472 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2015 13:31:44 -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 450 invoked by uid 89); 15 Sep 2015 13:31:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:31:43 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0DBDA304D; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:31:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t8FDVcCi007798; Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:31:39 -0400 Message-ID: <55F81DBA.7040105@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 13:31:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Support single step by arch or target References: <1441096915-23615-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1441096915-23615-3-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <1441096915-23615-3-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00324.txt.bz2 On 09/01/2015 09:41 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > +@item vContSupported > +This feature indicates whether @value{GDBN} wants to know the > +supported actions in the reply to @samp{vCont?} packet. > @end table > I find this confusing, because vCont? is already supposed to return the supported vCont actions: @item vCont? @cindex @samp{vCont?} packet Request a list of actions supported by the @samp{vCont} packet. So ISTM that in the perspective of someone reading the manual without the context we're discussing here, it's not clear at all what vContSupported is supposed to mean and why not simply always return the supported vCont actions in reply to vCont? Is there an advantage to the vContSupported indirection? I was originally thinking we'd make the server report "vCont=c;C;t;s;S;r" directly in its qSupported reply, and gdb would stop using "vCont?" going forward (if the target supports that qSupported feature). Thanks, Pedro Alves