From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1321 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2005 04:46:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 1314 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Dec 2005 04:46:42 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ausmtp03.au.ibm.com (HELO ausmtp03.au.ibm.com) (202.81.18.151) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 04:46:40 +0000 Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp03.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jBA4nkNY131492 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:49:51 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.244]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.8) with ESMTP id jBA4nYLn205318 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:49:35 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jBA4kVYi024125 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:46:31 +1100 Received: from [9.181.133.252] ([9.181.133.252]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jBA4kT4Y024116; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:46:30 +1100 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 22:23:00 -0000 From: Wu Zhou To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl Subject: Re: [RFC] GDB patches for hw watchpoints - revised In-Reply-To: <20051209050132.GA5325@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: References: <20051206202848.GA9568@nevyn.them.org> <20051209050132.GA5325@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-12/txt/msg00193.txt.bz2 On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 10:25:33AM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote: > > Currently what stored in the siginfo.si_addr is the address of next > > instruction. Anton sent me a patch to change that to the data address > > instead. I am now playing with the patched kernel. > > > > BTW. It seems that to_stopped_data_address is only used in rwatch and > > awatch, which is not that frequently used as watch itself. So may we > > postpone its implementation till some later time? > > No, let's get it right the first time. rwatch is extremely valuable, > and it sounds like you're having to play with ABI changes to get it to > work. OK. I will try to make it right the first time. :-) And can you elaborate on the statement that I am having to play with ABI changes to get it to work? It seems that you must find something noticeable, right? If so, please point out. Thanks. Regards - Wu Zhou