From: "Philippe Waroquiers" <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
To: "Pedro Alves" <pedro@codesourcery.com>, <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: <yao@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: x86 watchpoints bug (Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver))
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BB85C0C7E4DE4A759F5FCA4D62B30B55@soleil> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201107211712.26443.pedro@codesourcery.com>
> I think nothing else changed in the patch.
I looked at the new patch and re-tested on f12/x86 and debian5/amd64, using 7.3.
Behaviour looks ok to me regarding the handling of debug registers.
(note I tested with the patch allowing to change the remote hw watchpoint length,
which I believe could be committed soon : FSF papers ok, waiting for a user now).
During the testing, I however found something else slightly strange.
With reference to the previous s.c test program, watching a string length 1000
is ok at the start (handled as a sw breakpoint), but this watchpoint cannot be disabled
then re-enabled:
(gdb) watch s1000
Hardware watchpoint 1: s1000
(gdb) start <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< this runs slowly as s1000 is sw-watched
Temporary breakpoint 2 at 0x400480: file s.c, line 22.
Starting program: /home/philippe/gdb/s
Error in re-setting breakpoint 1: Expression cannot be implemented with read/access watchpoint.
Error in re-setting breakpoint 1: Expression cannot be implemented with read/access watchpoint.
Error in re-setting breakpoint 1: Expression cannot be implemented with read/access watchpoint.
Temporary breakpoint 2, main () at s.c:22
22 char * p = s1000;
(gdb) dis 1
(gdb) ena 1
Cannot enable watchpoint 1: Expression cannot be implemented with read/access watchpoint.
(gdb)
At this point, if the watchpoint is deleted then re-created, then the watchpoint is again 'sw-accepted'.
Note that this looks to be a regression in 7.3.50.20110722-cvs, as I do not see the same problem on 7.2.
This regression is not linked with the DR patch (occurs both with the patched/non patched 7.3.50).
So, in summary:
* the patch for the i386 debug register fix looks ok.
The following strange behaviours/bugs have still to be fixed or looked at:
* handling of duplicate locations across disabled breakpoints
(resulting in wrongly duplicated z packets and/or missing active debug registers in native)
* watch s1000 then run then disable then enable impossible
There was also a 'nice to have' which could be looked at:
* ensure that the insertion of watchpoint is done using the order of breakpoints
(so as to not have a new watchpoint causing an error/rejection on a previously accepted
watchpoint).
Thanks for all the work
Philippe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-22 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-21 22:20 ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver) Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-26 19:02 ` Tom Tromey
2011-05-29 13:01 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-30 15:26 ` Joel Brobecker
2011-05-31 19:07 ` x86 watchpoints bug (Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver)) Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 20:25 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 20:53 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 21:29 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 22:15 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 23:04 ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-01 14:35 ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-08 22:55 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-06-09 0:00 ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-09 22:16 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-07-21 17:20 ` Pedro Alves
2011-07-22 16:40 ` Philippe Waroquiers [this message]
2011-07-22 16:43 ` Pedro Alves
2011-07-23 16:28 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-07-26 20:02 ` software watchpoints bug (was: Re: x86 watchpoints bug) Pedro Alves
2011-07-27 3:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-07-22 17:19 ` x86 watchpoints bug (Re: ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver)) Pedro Alves
2011-05-27 3:25 ` ping: Re: PATCH : allow to set length of hw watchpoints (e.g. for Valgrind gdbserver) Yao Qi
2011-05-27 17:53 ` Tom Tromey
2011-05-27 17:59 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-30 4:06 ` Yao Qi
2011-05-30 5:34 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-30 5:48 ` Yao Qi
2011-05-30 6:31 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-05-31 17:31 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-31 18:06 ` Philippe Waroquiers
2011-06-01 15:15 ` Pedro Alves
2011-06-05 20:55 ` Philippe Waroquiers
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=BB85C0C7E4DE4A759F5FCA4D62B30B55@soleil \
--to=philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.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