From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 7FVIFQRgFWZfNikAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 11:34:28 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (768-bit key; unprotected) header.d=tromey.com header.i=@tromey.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=GDVgAAbX; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 454211E0C0; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 11:34:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DED531E030 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 11:34:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FF8384640D for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:34:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from omta038.useast.a.cloudfilter.net (omta038.useast.a.cloudfilter.net [44.202.169.37]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AF813861870 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 15:33:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9AF813861870 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tromey.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=tromey.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 9AF813861870 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=44.202.169.37 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1712676801; cv=none; b=CDqKryeMg0AEG5c/OHYs1mN6dfyJz8116r2VfGSCYQVZbs1CJ8lU4DqKu1FPU+kOYKPVnthobDrWl4nrYijMiJUKcC3SgYXn1mdttKUHG1OsSMLrghM1XJUoMB3CrSDwSJd4yQdcILRlxsUuCPfudARaAG0/K7Ek0OWK0T5prVY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1712676801; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V9FGQ5S0CPioUmFtLl9YJpx+JsTWJqQTbS28ch/4jog=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=w/cKwKHLFKn3pMavojxNzCF/6XmG8V5xagKIIabJQXapdOYwtNcOd6ZhlFZ7D59R0ZWk4qlYZCczbOZDyPcViG6oiA6HWxf+hfhYstuJlcgn2OprAj1TGfJSyBjh8Go2CvS880FyaYd+M2tOUei2zRWDZSaIH+Sfagyc63KaEqA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from eig-obgw-5002a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.0.29.215]) by cmsmtp with ESMTPS id trCerAut0Qr4SuDTCrkXNj; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 15:33:10 +0000 Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTPS id uDTBrmLb7r1IfuDTBrfvX0; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 15:33:09 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=BawT0at2 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=66155fb5 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=raytVjVEu-sA:10 a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10 a=KKAkSRfTAAAA:8 a=3FZyG46l6gIhP1RNT9wA:9 a=cvBusfyB2V15izCimMoJ:22 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Tgis/uTC4iHNlR2tdMX/s1Bca1kiXPObYK5AftyWAI0=; b=GDVgAAbXTCdXbAmtRz3/eQ/wWo Z6UetVl9/RXN+kry2+FZCj/J3cg2aLE5V5uy9L1xuhlPMBt/BfijXWDmXWpyQkoB3wQ7eDqx/hrzk h4ATY6mMZHQGAb+kVZQLWEYpW; Received: from 97-122-82-115.hlrn.qwest.net ([97.122.82.115]:38060 helo=murgatroyd) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ruDTA-0020uK-1s; Tue, 09 Apr 2024 09:33:08 -0600 From: Tom Tromey To: Gustavo Romero Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, luis.machado@arm.com, thiago.bauermann@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] gdb: Document qMemTagCheckAddr packet References: <20240404064819.2848899-1-gustavo.romero@linaro.org> <20240404064819.2848899-8-gustavo.romero@linaro.org> <87msq363yk.fsf@tromey.com> <44bc1d7f-65da-3db2-d3dd-a6b27beb2e9c@linaro.org> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 09:33:07 -0600 In-Reply-To: <44bc1d7f-65da-3db2-d3dd-a6b27beb2e9c@linaro.org> (Gustavo Romero's message of "Tue, 9 Apr 2024 10:23:11 -0300") Message-ID: <878r1m5z64.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - sourceware.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 97.122.82.115 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1ruDTA-0020uK-1s X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 97-122-82-115.hlrn.qwest.net (murgatroyd) [97.122.82.115]:38060 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 2 X-Org: HG=bhshared;ORG=bluehost; X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfB1hdsA9/Xnj/yXk7r67kgsHnLxLtPPeyYeeeg83ouFhRYazWO4h2uSEordkVUsDSGAC1gaIuvE40QYkN8nDwBXJlLXSF69MzTffYxvyJydwqWcPXMXX YF7EiHwdFTto1r63Jf862MgPrRh6etNwYksl+k5Baqk9SRVPFQ2MCvQgUgYy4Scak+dwDsfy3eO966wwTN9m5D/RcqStmZvKlbQ= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3015.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org >>>>> "Gustavo" == Gustavo Romero writes: >> Is querying really needed in this case? >> Like, if there is some user feature that requires knowing whether this >> work before ever trying it, then I guess that would be a good >> justification. In other cases, it seems to me that simply trying to use >> a packet is better than a qSupported response; or at least I don't know >> why it wouldn't be. Gustavo> That's right, I think we are in sync here. Luis communicated to me last week Gustavo> (private conversation) about this possibility, hence for v4 we just try to Gustavo> send the qMemTagCheckAddr packet, and if it fails (empty reply) there is a Gustavo> fallback to the current code path, which reads the smaps. So I'm dropping Gustavo> the memory-tagging-check-addr feature. Great, thank you. TBH I am not sure if my view on the desirability of probing versus qSupported is the correct one. Like, there may be counterexamples I'm unaware of. Tom