From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-21096-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 11283 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2005 19:59:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 11186 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2005 19:59:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao07.cox.net) (68.230.240.32)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 31 Mar 2005 19:59:44 -0000
Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao07.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP
          id <20050331195943.FQQH19214.lakermmtao07.cox.net@white>;
          Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:59:43 -0500
Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1DH6kE-0000Rn-00; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:58:26 -0500
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 19:59:00 -0000
From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [mi] watchpoint-scope exec async command
Message-ID: <20050331205826.GA1590@white>
Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
	GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
References: <20050328230048.GA1697@nevyn.them.org> <20050329014203.GB3801@white> <20050329013634.GB6373@nevyn.them.org> <20050329024945.GC3957@white> <20050329020123.GA7266@nevyn.them.org> <01c534a6$Blat.v2.4$944e44a0@zahav.net.il> <20050329214414.GA3498@nevyn.them.org> <01c53564$Blat.v2.4$1da3c140@zahav.net.il> <20050331014749.GA264@white> <01c535ab$Blat.v2.4$c21baac0@zahav.net.il>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <01c535ab$Blat.v2.4$c21baac0@zahav.net.il>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00323.txt.bz2

On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 06:39:23AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:47:49 -0500
> > From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> > Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
> > 
> > The first approach seems good, I was just wondering if that would
> > slow things down? Aren't hardware watchpoints must faster than
> > software?
> 
> With hardware watchpoints. the inferior runs at its normal speed.  So
> how would it slow down things if we leave the watchpoint in place in
> that case?

Sorry, I re-read what you wrote and understand it a little better now.

I do have another question though. If GDB has another mecanism to
determine when hardware watchpoints go out of scope, why does it add the
scope watchpoint at all? Is it added and then never used? or does  it
not serve a function at all in this case?

Thanks,
Bob Rossi