From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22200 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2006 14:08:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 22192 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2006 14:08:30 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:08:25 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FYkgn-0005G6-6K; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:08:21 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:55:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Koning Cc: inderpreetb@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB stub question? Message-ID: <20060426140821.GA20166@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Koning , inderpreetb@gmail.com, gdb@sourceware.org References: <1145862112.7595.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060424121630.GA19787@nevyn.them.org> <20060424123222.GA20402@nevyn.them.org> <20060426123642.GA18007@nevyn.them.org> <17487.32150.716304.944358@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17487.32150.716304.944358@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00318.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:03:02AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > >> Is there any way we could revert back to the old way (i.e) - set > >> breakpoint at the next address - continue - remove breakpoint. > > Daniel> GDB has never done this to implement source single stepping, > Daniel> so I don't know what you want. You can't predict the next > Daniel> address that far ahead; what if the current line contains a > Daniel> branch? > > Isn't there a "target side single step" optional packet -- so if the > stub supports that then gdb can just say "stepi" rather than the more > laborious process of setting one or two breakpoints and doing a > continue? It's not optional, really. GDB's configuration determines whether it will be used or not. And he's already using it, as far as I can tell. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery