From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30324 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2008 02:41:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 30291 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Nov 2008 02:41:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.185) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:40:40 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so1470820tib.12 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:40:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.110.37.17 with SMTP id k17mr3345272tik.21.1227580829653; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:40:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.110.103.3 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:40:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:47:00 -0000 From: teawater To: "Michael Snyder" Subject: Re: [RFA] Resubmit process record and replay, 6/10 Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" In-Reply-To: <492AFD8F.5000800@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4924C39B.7040101@vmware.com> <492AFD8F.5000800@vmware.com> 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: 2008-11/txt/msg00683.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 03:16, Michael Snyder wrote: > teawater wrote: >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> About "record_not_record_set", It set record_not_record to let P >> record doesn't record the memory and registers control behaviors of >> GDB in function record_store_registers and record_xfer_partial. >> >> So I think the name "record_not_record_set" and >> "record_skip_recording" are not very clear. >> Could you please give me some advices on it? > > Yeah, that's pretty much the way I understood it. > > It sets a one-time flag that says "omit (skip) recording > registers and memory that would otherwise be recorded". > > And if I understand correctly, this is to avoid adding > changes to the record log that are made by gdb when it > resumes the target. It's only called from "proceed()". > > I'm not completely clear on what those changes are. > Is gdb modifying the PC? Or are you perhaps trying to > avoid recording breakpoints? I think avoid recording breakpoints is the main affect. Another function is help deal with displaced step. Of course, P record and displaced step will not work together now. I think I add "record_not_record" function is because I want record_store_registers and record_xfer_partial just record the user level change, not for others. What do you think about it? > > Is there another way to detect and avoid recording these changes? > > I have no idea on it. What about change the name to "record_skip_recording_gdb_behavior"? Thanks, Hui