From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22915 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2002 14:51:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22907 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2002 14:51:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO saturn.billgatliff.com) (209.251.101.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Aug 2002 14:51:54 -0000 Received: by saturn.billgatliff.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 7D1DA4E0004; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 09:51:53 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 07:51:00 -0000 From: "William A. Gatliff" To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: using tracepoints function with both host and target on same computer Message-ID: <20020807095153.A5941@saturn.billgatliff.com> Reply-To: bgat@billgatliff.com References: <20020806215201.GA5715@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from eliz@is.elta.co.il on Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 08:08:54AM +0300 X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00051.txt.bz2 Eli: > IMHO, tracepoints should really become part of GDB itself, even for > native debugging. That would allow us to debug programs where timing is > critical, such as real-time software, Emacs display engine, etc. I miss > that feature a lot. Wouldn't some kind of stub be present in these situations anyway? So it'd still be an implementation concern for the stub... In fact, I don't see how you could do tracepoints effectively in anything resembling real time without stub assistance. b.g. -- Bill Gatliff bgat@billgatliff.com