From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10123 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2003 20:03:52 -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 10115 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2003 20:03:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Jul 2003 20:03:51 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19aLAL-0006ry-00; Wed, 09 Jul 2003 16:03:49 -0400 Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 20:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Kris Warkentin Cc: Kevin Buettner , Andrew Cagney , "Gdb@Sources.Redhat.Com" Subject: Re: [rfc] Print solib events in mi-mode Message-ID: <20030709200349.GA26354@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Kris Warkentin , Kevin Buettner , Andrew Cagney , "Gdb@Sources.Redhat.Com" References: <090201c3463f$acc520f0$0202040a@catdog> <1030709174134.ZM2191@localhost.localdomain> <093901c34642$884d0280$0202040a@catdog> <095501c34644$31dec7b0$0202040a@catdog> <20030709180553.GA23828@nevyn.them.org> <099e01c34646$ea45e4d0$0202040a@catdog> <20030709183041.GA24498@nevyn.them.org> <09d201c3464e$2011b290$0202040a@catdog> <20030709194608.GA25806@nevyn.them.org> <0a2d01c34654$ccf74460$0202040a@catdog> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0a2d01c34654$ccf74460$0202040a@catdog> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 04:00:52PM -0400, Kris Warkentin wrote: > > > The other is just to compare against a dll_pathname so we could get away > > > with creating a SOLIB_WAS_(UN)LOADED(pid, "libname") and have the > backend > > > check through the list for libname. > > > > Sure. Or return a list and let solib.c sort between 'em. > > Do you think these functions should be in current_target_so_ops? Hmm... yes, probably. > > > Okay...that seems reasonable. Another question: since we've already got > a > > > solib breakpoint set in svr4, we don't need to call > > > create_solib_load_event_breakpoint() like somsolib.c and pa64solib.c do. > > > Can you have multiple types associated with a single break or do we just > set > > > another at the same address? > > > > It should be multiple "catchpoints", and inserting catchpoints would do > > nothing to the target. This may require violence to the breakpoint > > system, which is why I haven't done it yet :( > > You're suggesting a list of gdb "actions" associated with a single > breakpoint on the target? IE, test for a condition, execute a catch, check > solibs on the target, etc.? No, a set of catchpoints (type bp_catch_load), one for each condition. But inserting or removing them would do nothing on svr4; the breakpoint is always inserted. When we hit that breakpoint we would check for all catch_load and catch_unloads. This is part of the needed breakpoint overhaul. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer