From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
To: Jiri Smid <smid@suse.cz>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA]: x86_64 target - multiarch
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 07:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010905172637.15665G-100000@is> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <s8vr8tlenxi.fsf@naga.suse.cz>
On 5 Sep 2001, Jiri Smid wrote:
> * config/djgpp/fnchange.lst: Add entries for x86_64-linux-tdep.c
> and x86_64-linux-nat.c
These changes are approved.
> + int
> + x86_64_insert_watchpoint (ptid_t ptid, CORE_ADDR addr, int len, int rw)
> + {
> + return x86_64_insert_aligned_watchpoint (ptid, addr, addr, len, rw);
> + }
> +
> + static int
> + x86_64_insert_aligned_watchpoint (ptid_t ptid, CORE_ADDR waddr,
> + CORE_ADDR addr, int len, int rw)
> + {
> + int i;
> + int read_write_bits, len_bits;
> + int free_debug_register;
> + int register_number;
> +
> + /* Look for a free debug register. */
> + for (i = DR_FIRSTADDR; i <= DR_LASTADDR; i++)
> + {
> + if (address_lookup[i - DR_FIRSTADDR] == 0)
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + /* No more debug registers! */
> + if (i > DR_LASTADDR)
> + return -1;
> +
> + read_write_bits = (rw & 1) ? DR_RW_READ : DR_RW_WRITE;
> +
> + if (len == 1)
> + len_bits = DR_LEN_1;
> + else if (len == 2)
> + {
> + if (addr % 2)
> + return x86_64_insert_nonaligned_watchpoint (ptid, waddr, addr, len,
> + rw);
> + len_bits = DR_LEN_2;
> + }
I think I already mentioned this in earlier discussions: why did you base
the watchpoint support on the old SysV stuff instead of the newer code in
i386-nat.c? Don't you want the additional features supported by
i386-nat.c, like debug register sharing between watchpoints? Try this,
for example:
(gdb) watch a == 1
(gdb) watch a == 2
(gdb) watch a == 3
(gdb) watch a == 4
In your implementation, this takes 4 debug registers, whereas i386-nat.c
will only use one. Also, with your implementation, even if you are ready
to waste 3 debug registers, GDB might become confused if you decide to
remove one of these watchpoints (since the remove_watchpoint code will
zero out all the debug registers because they watch the same address).
Also, I think this implementation doesn't support watching regions larger
than 8 bytes very well, because the code which removes watchpoints
doesn't break the region into smaller regions the same way
x86_64_insert_nonaligned_watchpoint does.
So I suggest to use the code in i386-nat.c as the starting point.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-05 7:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-05 7:02 Jiri Smid
2001-09-05 7:38 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2001-09-05 15:31 ` Mark Kettenis
2001-09-05 18:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-06 0:30 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-09-11 5:13 ` Jiri Smid
2001-09-11 5:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-09-12 2:31 ` Jiri Smid
2001-09-05 17:55 ` Andrew Cagney
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=Pine.SUN.3.91.1010905172637.15665G-100000@is \
--to=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=smid@suse.cz \
/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