From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22064 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2006 05:41:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 22051 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Jan 2006 05:41:44 -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; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 05:41:35 +0000 Received: from sd0112e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh903.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.201]) by ausmtp03.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k065i3WQ049814 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:44:07 +1100 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (d23av02.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.243]) by sd0112e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.8) with ESMTP id k065hrxq165944 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:43:53 +1100 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k065elux001790 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:40:48 +1100 Received: from wks190239wss.cn.ibm.com (wks190239wss.cn.ibm.com [9.181.133.187] (may be forged)) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k065efC2001570; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 16:40:43 +1100 Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 05:41:00 -0000 From: Wu Zhou To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com cc: drow@false.org, eliz@gnu.org, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, kevinb@redhat.com, uweigand@de.ibm.com, bje@au1.ibm.com, anton@au1.ibm.com Subject: About the patch to add h/w watchpoint to ppc arch Message-ID: 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: 2006-01/txt/msg00071.txt.bz2 Hello maintainers, We have discussed a lot about this patch. And I had made some modification to the original to make it more acceptable. I am now revisiting the patch to see whether it is ok to check it in. The latest patch is at: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2005-12/msg00250.html It addressed the issue of getting the stopped data address. Eli said that it made sense. Others didn't replied. Could I take this as no objection? :-) Said that, I am still very open to different opinions. Suggestion for improvement are highly appreciated! I am not sure whether there are any other problems hindering its acceptance. The patch didn't add anything more to nm.h now(Thanks Mark, Ulrich ... for suggesting ways to achieve this); It tested ok on p630(will try to find other ppc machines to test this); It uses run-time check to see whether kernel support DABR manipulation or whether target machine have DABR registers. One issue might be that some 32-bits ppc cpu might have more than one DABRs (I am not sure which ones have >1 DABRs, Daniel and Anton suggested that). But I think that this patch still works ok with any 32-bits ppc models. The reason is that the current 32-bits ppc kernel don't support PTRACE_SET_DEBUGREG, so the run-time check in ppc_linux_check_watch_resources will fail and hence there won't be any difference than the unpatched GDB. Any different opinion on this? Another issue I can think of is that Anton's patch to return stopped data address upon DABR hit is not in the upstream kernel yet. But I believe that there won't be many objection for that, provided that it will only impact debugger behavior. If it is a pre-requirement for this patch to go into gdb, I can ping Anton to get his patch into kernel first. Are there any other issues? Maybe some documents or testcase? If it is needed, I can add a testcase for rwatch/awatch or some words somewhere. These are all I can think of at this time. Did I miss something? Your comments/suggestion are highly appreciated! Regards - Wu Zhou