From: Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com>,
Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>, <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Enable range stepping for ARM on GDBServer
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 16:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <wwokpoonh8kg.fsf@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fb926e69-f730-1659-668d-93d3b7453306@redhat.com>
Pedro Alves writes:
> On 09/01/2016 04:21 PM, Antoine Tremblay wrote:
>>
>> Pedro Alves writes:
>>
>>> On 08/31/2016 08:14 PM, Antoine Tremblay wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm sorry I can't be more helpful at the moment but I wanted to post
>>>> this issue before I have to leave for a while.
>>>
>>> Understood. Does enabling range stepping unblock something else?
>>
>> It would unblock ARM tracepoints, as per Yao's requirements...
>
> Tracepoints make gdbserver single-step and then not report the event
> to gdb, so I do see the parallel with range-stepping. Throwing
> while-stepping into the equation would make it even more clear.
>
> But maybe we can paralyze? If enabling tracepoints without range
> stepping causes no known regression, but enabling range stepping with
> no tracepoints causes regressions, seems to me like we could put
> tracepoints in first, and fix whatever range stepping problems
> in parallel.
>
I would totally agree with that. (tracepoints do not cause any
regressions without range stepping)
Yao ?
> Skipping the test sounds far from ideal to me, since the test has a
> tendency of catching problems. Witness patch 1/2 in this very
> series, for example...
Indeed.
Thanks,
Antoine
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-01 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-31 17:14 [PATCH 1/2] Fix lwp_suspend/unsuspend imbalance in linux_wait_1 Antoine Tremblay
2016-08-31 17:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] Enable range stepping for ARM on GDBServer Antoine Tremblay
2016-08-31 17:50 ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-31 18:15 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-08-31 18:39 ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-31 19:14 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-09-01 13:37 ` Pedro Alves
2016-09-01 15:21 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-09-01 15:59 ` Pedro Alves
2016-09-01 16:44 ` Yao Qi
2016-09-01 17:02 ` Pedro Alves
2016-09-01 17:06 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-09-01 16:46 ` Antoine Tremblay [this message]
2016-09-18 19:58 ` Yao Qi
2016-08-31 17:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] Fix lwp_suspend/unsuspend imbalance in linux_wait_1 Pedro Alves
2016-08-31 17:50 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-08-31 17:52 ` Pedro Alves
2016-08-31 18:25 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-08-31 19:16 ` Antoine Tremblay
2016-09-01 13:09 ` Pedro Alves
2016-09-01 15:12 ` Antoine Tremblay
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=wwokpoonh8kg.fsf@ericsson.com \
--to=antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox