From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24525 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2008 12:03:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 24516 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Sep 2008 12:03:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:03:03 +0000 Received: from zps76.corp.google.com (zps76.corp.google.com [172.25.146.76]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id m8NC2tqT017184 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:02:56 +0100 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rvbf25.prod.google.com [10.140.82.25]) by zps76.corp.google.com with ESMTP id m8NC2rOu029823 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:02:54 -0700 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id f25so2108763rvb.54 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:02:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.13.16 with SMTP id q16mr2670047rvi.99.1222171373610; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:02:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.99.20 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:02:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:03:00 -0000 From: "Doug Evans" To: "Bart Veer" Subject: Re: add file I/O support when debugging an embedded target via jtag Cc: stan@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48BAAC44.4000002@codesourcery.com> X-GMailtapped-By: 172.25.146.76 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00474.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 3:14 AM, Bart Veer wrote: > >>> Following on from > >>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-08/msg00315.html, I have not > >>> heard anything about the code in the last two weeks. Do you know if > >>> anybody is looking at it? Also, if there is a likelihood that the > >>> patch will be accepted then I should probably get started on the > >>> assignment paperwork. > > Stan> To be honest, I looked at it but didn't understand why all > Stan> this stuff seemed necessary. If this is not for the remote > Stan> protocol, then what is it for? A target supported by GDB, or > Stan> something else? > > Bart> The rationale was given in > Bart> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2008-07/msg00045.html > > > > Just wondering if you had had a chance to take another look at this. > It has now been six weeks since the original posting. Hi. fwiw, I've read the patch and past emails. fwiw, I love the idea but wonder if it should be done differently. Adding a new stratum feels wrong to me too. But maybe I'm missing something so let me first ask a question. Basically all you need is a way to run some special code when a particular breakpoint is hit, right? [There's some housekeeping like needing to intercept program loads (IIRC), but basically the high order bit is running special code when a particular breakpoint is hit, right?] I'm just wondering if this can be done differently without being as invasive on GDB's innards. My off-the-cuff thought is to see if this is something that could be handled from Python.