Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
Cc: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] Refactor arm_software_single_step to use regcache.
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:11:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56603F64.6050906@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86egf3u8py.fsf@gmail.com>



On 12/03/2015 05:28 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> writes:
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
>> 	* common/common-regcache.h (register_status) New enum.
>> 	(regcache_raw_read_unsigned): New declaration.
>> 	* regcache.h (enum register_status): Move to common-regcache.h.
>> 	(regcache_raw_read_unsigned): Likewise.
>>
>> gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 	* regcache.c (regcache_raw_read_unsigned): New function.
>> 	* regcache.h (REG_UNAVAILABLE, REG_VALID): Replaced by shared
>> 	register_status enum.
>> 	(init_register_cache): Initialize cache to REG_UNAVAILABLE.
>
> Adding regcache_raw_read_unsigned in GDBserver looks unrelated to this
> patch.  I know patch #4 will use regcache_raw_read_unsigned in
> GDBserver, so this change can be patch 3.5.

Ok. I can split that.

>
>>      another breakpoint by our caller.  */
>>
>>   static CORE_ADDR
>> -thumb_get_next_pc_raw (struct frame_info *frame, CORE_ADDR pc)
>> +thumb_get_next_pc_raw (struct regcache *regcache, struct frame_info *frame,
>> +		       CORE_ADDR pc)
>
> Do we still need frame?  it should be removed.

Unfortunately we do for the syscall_next_pc target dependent call.

The reason I did not change syscall_next_pc for regcache is that this 
would require the implementation of a syscall_next_pc that is not using 
the frame unwinders and directly inspects the stack for multiple targets.

This would need to be done for arm,  mips, nios2, and tix6x.

software_single_step would also have to be adapted for mips, nios2 and 
tix6x for this new api.

While I do understand the intention to get rid of frame completely in 
software_single_step and I accepted to do some of this refactoring as 
part of this series like we discussed in option #1 in a previous email,
I think the syscall_next_pc refactoring should be left for option #2 as 
after all it does not have much to do with supporting software single 
step on GDBServer which this path series is about.

Also I do not have mips,nios2 or tix6x which makes me uneasy about doing 
this without testing. (My request for the gcc buildfarm is still pending.)

So for now, I ask that we keep frame for syscall_next_pc and allow 
support for software single step on ARM on GDBserver to make progress.

It will not be more difficult to refactor after this patch series the 
syscall_next_pc call along with all the other apis that would need to be 
changed for gdbarch software_single_step to use regcache globally.

>
>> @@ -4746,20 +4775,22 @@ thumb_get_next_pc_raw (struct frame_info *frame, CORE_ADDR pc)
>>      address.  */
>>
>>   static CORE_ADDR
>> -arm_get_next_pc_raw (struct frame_info *frame, CORE_ADDR pc)
>> +arm_get_next_pc_raw (struct regcache *regcache, struct frame_info *frame,
>> +		     CORE_ADDR pc)
>
> Likewise.
>
>> @@ -5019,14 +5057,15 @@ arm_get_next_pc_raw (struct frame_info *frame, CORE_ADDR pc)
>>      loop is detected.  */
>>
>>   CORE_ADDR
>> -arm_get_next_pc (struct frame_info *frame, CORE_ADDR pc)
>> +arm_get_next_pc (struct regcache *regcache, struct frame_info *frame,
>> +		 CORE_ADDR pc)
>>   {
>
> Likewise.
>
>> diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/regcache.c b/gdb/gdbserver/regcache.c
>> index b9311fe..c608bf3 100644
>> --- a/gdb/gdbserver/regcache.c
>> +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/regcache.c
>> @@ -145,8 +145,9 @@ init_register_cache (struct regcache *regcache,
>>   	= (unsigned char *) xcalloc (1, tdesc->registers_size);
>>         regcache->registers_owned = 1;
>>         regcache->register_status
>> -	= (unsigned char *) xcalloc (1, tdesc->num_registers);
>> -      gdb_assert (REG_UNAVAILABLE == 0);
>> +	= (unsigned char *) xmalloc (tdesc->num_registers);
>> +      memset ((void *) regcache->register_status, REG_UNAVAILABLE,
>> +	      tdesc->num_registers);
>
> Odd indentation.
>

Humm what is odd exactly ?

>>   #else
>>         gdb_assert_not_reached ("can't allocate memory from the heap");
>>   #endif
>> @@ -435,6 +436,27 @@ collect_register (struct regcache *regcache, int n, void *buf)
>>   	  register_size (regcache->tdesc, n));
>>   }
>>
>> +enum register_status
>> +regcache_raw_read_unsigned (struct regcache *regcache, int regnum,
>> +			    ULONGEST *val)
>
> Odd indentation.
>

Likewise ?


  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-03 13:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-02 13:18 [PATCH v4 0/6] Support software single step and conditional breakpoints on ARM in GDBServer Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:18 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] Share some ARM target dependent code from GDB with GDBServer Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:18 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] Replace breakpoint_reinsert_addr by get_next_pcs operation in GDBServer Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:18 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] Enable conditional breakpoints for targets that support software single step " Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:18 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] Refactor arm_software_single_step to use regcache Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-03 10:28   ` Yao Qi
2015-12-03 13:11     ` Antoine Tremblay [this message]
2015-12-03 14:37       ` Yao Qi
2015-12-03 14:41         ` Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:18 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] Enable software single stepping for while-stepping actions in GDBServer Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-02 13:19 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] Support software single step on ARM " Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-03 11:17   ` Yao Qi
2015-12-03 13:58     ` Antoine Tremblay
2015-12-03 14:49       ` Yao Qi
2015-12-02 13:36 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] Support software single step and conditional breakpoints " Pedro Alves
2015-12-02 13:52   ` Antoine Tremblay

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=56603F64.6050906@ericsson.com \
    --to=antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
    /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