From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29601 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2006 02:27:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 29590 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jun 2006 02:27:02 -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; Thu, 08 Jun 2006 02:26:57 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FoAEY-000899-Ew; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 22:26:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 03:50:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: PAUL GILLIAM Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Instrcutions that must not be stepped. Message-ID: <20060608022654.GA31271@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: PAUL GILLIAM , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <1149726000.10016.71.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1149726000.10016.71.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 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: 2006-06/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 05:19:59PM -0700, PAUL GILLIAM wrote: > Does there currently exist an arch. independent way to detect > instruction sequences that must not be single stepped? Failing that, is > there some hook I can use to implement this for just the PowerPC? Nope. You'd have to add one. And, you'd have to be able to tell whether you were in the middle of a GDB-automated step or a user stepi; stepping multiple instructions when the user asked for one is probably just confusing. Reading the instruction before stepping is going to slow down single stepping. Is there some other way we can handle this? The same problem applies to many other architectures, e.g. MIPS and ARM. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery