From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12496 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2012 20:41:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 12481 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Feb 2012 20:41:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 20:40:57 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LZT00700ARCW800@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:40:55 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.49.84]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LZT007CMAS6SA90@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:40:55 +0200 (IST) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 23:43:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] agent doc In-reply-to: <4F454F22.3000007@redhat.com> To: Pedro Alves Cc: yao@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83hayitxge.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1329447300-18841-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1329447300-18841-5-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <83booxwv0m.fsf@gnu.org> <4F3E5251.1030202@codesourcery.com> <83r4xsuxft.fsf@gnu.org> <4F41B2B1.2040303@codesourcery.com> <4F43D3E3.8070307@redhat.com> <4F4444C0.3050402@codesourcery.com> <4F454F22.3000007@redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-02/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 20:25:06 +0000 > From: Pedro Alves > CC: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > Hmm, it still seems incorrect in the exact same way. > > > -When GDB is debugging a remote target, the GDB @dfn{agent} code running > > +Although called @dfn{agent expression}, because they originally > > +referred to the in-process agent (@pxref{In-Process Agent}), these > > Still false. Looks unchanged compared to the previous version? > > > +When @value{GDBN} is debugging, the @value{GDBN} agent code running > > on the target computes the values of the expressions itself. To avoid > > -having a full symbolic expression evaluator on the agent, GDB translates > > -expressions in the source language into a simpler bytecode language, and > > -then sends the bytecode to the agent; the agent then executes the > > -bytecode, and records the values for GDB to retrieve later. > > +having a full symbolic expression evaluator on the agent or remote stub, > > This is still confused on agent vs in-process agent. The remote stub is > an agent as well; it does things for gdb (e.g., GDBserver supports tracepoints). > Note the several references to "agent" on this whole paragraph. I suggest > really just leave this paragraph as it was. > > > +@value{GDBN} translates expressions in the source language into a simpler > > +bytecode language, and then sends the bytecode to the agent; the agent > > +then executes the bytecode, and records the values for @value{GDBN} to > > +retrieve later. > > We lost the intro about tracepoints, so this mention of recording values > for gdb to retrieve later is now awkward. Pedro, how about if you write whatever you think we should say there, in whatever shape it is easy for you, and I will then polish it if necessary? (The "polish" suggestion is to avoid wasting too much of your time on stylistic issues.)