From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-59153-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 17063 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2008 02:32:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 17054 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Oct 2008 02:32:25 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.186)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Oct 2008 02:31:50 +0000
Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so2691443tib.12         for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.110.40.8 with SMTP id n8mr10146026tin.50.1223519507697;         Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.110.42.9 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Oct 2008 19:31:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <daef60380810081931h419ac0d8pbdc1b304204cd2c0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 02:32:00 -0000
From: teawater <teawater@gmail.com>
To: "Pedro Alves" <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [reverse] PATCH: Several interface changes
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@vmware.com>
In-Reply-To: <200810090027.54477.pedro@codesourcery.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200810071709.48346.pedro@codesourcery.com> 	 <daef60380810080028g1295f34bp94e386546d88e125@mail.gmail.com> 	 <48ED15B4.9040401@vmware.com> 	 <200810090027.54477.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00269.txt.bz2

I think about it again in this morning.

Maybe P record doesn't need make threads execute in different
direction. Cause P record reverse executes base on replay mode. This
mode will replay the memory change and the registers change. And all
threads of one process share the memory. So...

Of course, I am not clear the other reverse implement. Maybe they will need it.

Thanks,
Hui

On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 07:27, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 October 2008 21:19:00, Michael Snyder wrote:
>
>> Pedro, future enhancement?
>
> Yes, sure.
>
> (Please do take a look at the remote protocol change I was making.)
>
> --
> Pedro Alves
>