From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20512 invoked by alias); 14 Jun 2008 03:20:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 20503 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jun 2008 03:19:59 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.189) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:19:41 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so1232263tib.12 for ; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.70.5 with SMTP id s5mr2215374tia.21.1213413578855; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.110.109.4 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:24:00 -0000 From: teawater To: "Michael Snyder" Subject: Re: GDB record patch 0.1.3.1 for GDB-6.8 release Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, "Thiago Jung Bauermann" , "Pedro Alves" In-Reply-To: <1213295393.3601.669.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200805231746.23570.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200806090152.00220.pedro@codesourcery.com> <1213204275.3601.605.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1213295393.3601.669.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00255.txt.bz2 Hi Michael, I am reading "msnyder-reverse-20080609-branch". I want to say that it's so great. It make all the reverse function very clear. I like it. :) And I want say thanks to Pedro. Your idea that make recrd to be a target is very fit "msnyder-reverse-20080609-branch". To make record work with "msnyder-reverse-20080609-branch" without your idea is so hard. :) I want to make record to be a target how do you think about it? Thanks, teawater On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 02:29, Michael Snyder wrote: > Good --- making some good progress toward testing it. > At a fairly basic level, it seems to work, but there > may have been a little bit-rot around the most tricky > bits (stepping backward in and out of functions, that > sort of thing). > > Hui, you might look at isolating just the > "set exec-direction" part and the target bits. > Those might integrate well with what you are doing. > > On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 13:50 +0800, teawater wrote: >> Thanks Michael, >> >> I've got it and read it. :) >> >> Hui >> >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 01:11, Michael Snyder wrote: >> > On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 15:45 +0800, teawater wrote: >> >> Hi Pedro, >> >> >> >> > Don't worry, it's really more about code reorganization, than >> >> > rewriting. :-) >> >> > >> >> > You have two major components in your patch. >> >> > >> >> > 1 - The record/replay component >> >> > 2 - The inferior control in reverse execution mode. >> >> > >> >> > I'm suggesting to split those up, and make them communicate >> >> > with an abstracted interface (target methods). In addition, >> >> > make the record support a layer on top of the >> >> > forward-execution-only debugging targets (of course, defering >> >> > much to the arch support). >> >> > >> >> Michael Snyder is think about it too. He make a rev interface in >> >> before. I will try to use it. >> > >> > Hui, >> > >> > I've created a new branch in which I've hoisted my old >> > reverse-debugging changes into the current codebase. >> > It compiles, but I haven't had a chance to test it yet >> > to see if it actually works in reverse. >> > >> > You might like to take a look at it, to get an idea of >> > the direction we were most recently headed -- maybe diff >> > it against the base to look at the changes. >> > >> > Branch name: msnyder-reverse-20080609-branch >> > >> > >> > >> > > >