From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id wbHQAwI+zl/uRQAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 09:36:50 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 06C2F1F096; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 09:36:50 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (unknown [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BF221E552 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 09:36:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED587389C423; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:36:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org ED587389C423 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1607351809; bh=0NQyAWq8Y78EoSrIHf8FVJ9DnqAPAmm9Mn2ijFe2lII=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=IxK/t961rd7aVoPDJbdvXjrMJLikQ85n9DQrbECAfWyRjlfx3vaqSz8wr9ZRW0YN8 PicXlIL4rsGJ4m80InaN6DnmUeh/7wbAb8PkOGvifngsfEK0ocAUE7dCbEqGSsXDSO UsL5Tnzde8NaAbkrkP3Mo8w0zYZc213FPEyoMm8k= Received: from mail-qt1-x844.google.com (mail-qt1-x844.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::844]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4153A385783D for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:36:46 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 4153A385783D Received: by mail-qt1-x844.google.com with SMTP id k4so9467876qtj.10 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 06:36:46 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0NQyAWq8Y78EoSrIHf8FVJ9DnqAPAmm9Mn2ijFe2lII=; b=EbNi3VtM3huYn5UmP5GLayQsaIIY3shJ9watvL9E8LkN42smVKLGSLvONhZi2wV6VG 8Rznxapd1+CpIE+EtBpewM7Esv9EzVDf3LoMkn6LTmV05MlXe1aHUrF7WGSesLCYnpNZ 7MtA3G+CYXg0iU2Dzc/XDM42VZtPPJV8TUsUV5AQ91RSMA5dr9wmazIwY+OE21lN6stB Ai0zyXM7agft8v/aq2FsO+1IREprLRU6sc/jKfacMzSdb8/FoKw6blddsoDVyqB3jR51 rWRSMSqwdfqHZEiSDvtja3SJZMZNo24q2HegTL6EFMUiAKjDayZBComD+IQ2Qd93+3dn XoRw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530CYZL1GEZJaHMjdVeOAIJIY428l85ThbaFN7mD4Wbu8c4swSiy s6j5zQxMPfc+2eFCXSZGYdwLbEtZ7rR7PQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypoljgXRiVj0oTZprrt6/RTbHNGyuiSRLN3VgjCBc61Ar/YfpfZE8v7oHMvCdTyybTD24UiA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:74c7:: with SMTP id j7mr6111243qtr.102.1607351805687; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 06:36:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2804:7f0:8284:370e:2cb7:754f:737c:109f? ([2804:7f0:8284:370e:2cb7:754f:737c:109f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p76sm7937440qke.62.2020.12.07.06.36.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Dec 2020 06:36:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gdb/doc: clarify the language for the '?' packet To: =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20201207135319.31884-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:36:42 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201207135319.31884-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Luis Machado Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 12/7/20 10:53 AM, Alex Bennée via Gdb-patches wrote: > Both QEMU and kgdb make the assumption that the '?' packet is only > sent during the initial setup of a gdbstub connection. Both use that > knowledge to reset breakpoints and ensure the gdbstub is in a > clean-state on a resumed connection. This can cause confusion for > others implementing clients that speak to gdbstub devices. To avoid > that make the language clearer that this is a start-up query packet > that you only expect to see once. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée > --- > gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo b/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo > index 8bff27c940d..f5b6fdd8691 100644 > --- a/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo > +++ b/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo > @@ -39273,9 +39273,9 @@ The remote target both supports and has enabled extended mode. > > @item ? > @cindex @samp{?} packet > -@anchor{? packet} > -Indicate the reason the target halted. The reply is the same as for > -step and continue. This packet has a special interpretation when the > +@anchor{? packet} Is a query sent when connection is first established > +to query the reason the target halted. The reply is the same as for More like "to query the status of the target". To see if it is running, stopped etc... With that clarification, I think this looks good. Others may have more feedback. It is important to mention this is a very old packet with a historically vague description, but I think it is safe to say GDB doesn't have a reason to send it more than once per remote session.