From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Peter.Schauer" To: kettenis@wins.uva.nl (Mark Kettenis) Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, eliz@is.elta.co.il Subject: Re: gdb doesn't work very well with dynamic linked binaries Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 14:39:00 -0000 Message-id: <200009092139.XAA15606@reisser.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> References: <200009071009.e87A9oh14388@debye.wins.uva.nl> X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00094.html > The bug I mentioned previously is exactly that they're getting > cleared by the kernel and then not getting restored on return > to user space, leaving them wrong until the next reschedule :-( > > I think I understand the problems now. It basically means that one > cannot reliably watch area's that are somehow used in system calls. > > I suspect that Linux isn't the only kernel with this bug. AFAICS > FreeBSD also simply disables any (user-space) watchpoints triggered > from within the kernel. I don't know what the various x86 System V's > (Solaris, SCO Open Server 5) do, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is > broken there too. AFAIK Solaris never provided access to the x86 debug registers. Starting with Solaris 2.6, support for hardware watchpoints is provided via procfs (protect pages which contain watchpoint areas, examine address on pagefault, cause breakpoint if address is within watchpoint area). Perhaps this scheme (which allows for an arbitrary number of watchpoints) could be adopted by the Linux kernel. Debug register access might be valuable for embedded targets, but the generic x86 target should not assume availability of debug register access. -- Peter Schauer pes@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de >From gkarabin@pobox.com Sat Sep 09 16:16:00 2000 From: George Karabin To: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Multi-Ice server? Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2000 16:16:00 -0000 Message-id: <39BAC4C0.56EDC24@pobox.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00095.html Content-length: 524 It's my understanding that gdb can interface to a Multi-Ice server running on Windows by using the "multi-ice-gdb-server", which wraps around the actual Multi-Ice server that ARM distributes. Has anyone looked into developing a replacement for ARM's Multi-Ice server, or talked to ARM about releasing the source for theirs? I'd really like to have the option of doing all of my ARM development on Linux, but the need to have a Windows box to interface to the Multi-Ice box itself is both kludgy and a waste of resources.