From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16625 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2010 15:03:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 16523 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jun 2010 15:03:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (217.140.96.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:03:03 +0000 Received: from cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com (cam-owa2.emea.arm.com [10.1.105.18]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id o5AF2xeI016912; Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:02:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from e102139 ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:02:59 +0100 From: "Will Deacon" To: "'karthikeyan.s'" Cc: "Matthew Gretton-Dann" , References: <1275405490.22316.12.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <-3629479195726626766@unknownmsgid> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [HELP]Can GDB for ARM set hard breakpoint when native debugging? Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:03:00 -0000 Message-ID: <004901cb08ae$028121a0$078364e0$@deacon@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00038.txt.bz2 H Karthik, > Did you have issue any issues(kernel crash) with the watch_thread_num > test gdb test (testsuite) with your gdb changes (And offcourse with > you kernel backend!)? ( watch_thread_num is in > gdb/testsuite/gdb.base). The issue is not just with watchpoints but > also breakpoints. I am using a 2.6.33 kernel for which you had posted > the patch version2. Since you're trying to use this stuff, I've just submitted a new version of the patchset: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010-June/017680.html Please see if the issue occurs with the new code. Unfortunately, I've not had a chance to test it because the ptrace interface has changed and I don't have a GDB that can `talk the talk'. Thanks, Will