From: Craig Blackmore <craig.blackmore@embecosm.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Koning <paulkoning@comcast.net>,
Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>,
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: enable have_nonsteppable_watchpoint by default
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2018 17:20:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5bd138ad-4d1d-254c-9d35-1873b2d8f5f4@embecosm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181008145132.GB2993@adacore.com>
On 08/10/18 15:51, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> I think MIPS is one. The documentation is not entirely clear but
>>> that's what I remember from using it.
>> x86 is another. But my question is -- do we know of any RISC-V
>> implementation that triggers after the write, given that the spec
>> says it should trigger before the write.
I don't know of any RISC-V implementations that trigger after the write.
The debug spec has 'suggested breakpoint timings' but the triggers are
allowed to fire at whatever point is most convenient for the implementation.
I suggest that Joel's earlier patch
(https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2018-09/msg00821.html) be
upstreamed so that things work for the majority of systems. We can
handle implementations with other timings later, if they appear.
Thanks,
Craig
> That was what I meant as well; I agree with Pedro that we don't
> really need to do anything fancy if:
> - the spec's recommendation is to trigger before the write
> - and we don't know of any system that decided to go against
> the recommendation.
> The day we discover a system that does in fact go against the
> recommendation, we can simply deal with it then and decide what
> the best course of action is.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-09 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-16 0:13 Craig Blackmore
2018-09-17 10:34 ` Andrew Burgess
2018-09-24 11:36 ` Craig Blackmore
2018-10-03 22:37 ` Joel Brobecker
2018-10-04 16:26 ` Craig Blackmore
2018-10-08 9:58 ` Andrew Burgess
2018-10-08 11:56 ` Pedro Alves
2018-10-08 14:25 ` Joel Brobecker
2018-10-08 14:37 ` Paul Koning
2018-10-08 14:42 ` Pedro Alves
2018-10-08 14:51 ` Joel Brobecker
2018-10-09 17:20 ` Craig Blackmore [this message]
2018-10-09 17:29 ` Paul Koning
2018-10-09 17:39 ` Pedro Alves
2018-10-23 10:34 ` Andrew Burgess
2018-10-08 14:50 ` Andreas Schwab
2018-09-17 12:54 ` Pedro Alves
2018-09-17 13:34 ` Andrew Burgess
2018-10-08 11:29 ` 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=5bd138ad-4d1d-254c-9d35-1873b2d8f5f4@embecosm.com \
--to=craig.blackmore@embecosm.com \
--cc=andrew.burgess@embecosm.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=paulkoning@comcast.net \
/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