From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Wendy Peikes <wendyp@cisco.com>
Cc: gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Anyone using efficient algorithm or HW support for NEXT/STEP?
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:44:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D94FB80.4030201@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D94C824.62A5113B@cisco.com>
Some thoughts:
- The latest GDB supports ``set trust-readonly-sections'' on. Which
stops GDB going to the target for prologe analysis. This is a big win.
- enhance the ``T'' packet to return registers such as PC, FP, ARG0, ...
that can help avoid the need for GDB to fetch all registers
- investigate a thread aware step-out-of-range packet.
Andrew
> Here at Cisco, we've gotten both the host (started with gnu gdb 5.0)
> and target gdb working for arm-elf.
>
> (Note: I'd be glad to answer any questions about the arm gdb host
> side and help with target-side questions)
>
> We're (my target-side colleague and myself) are wondering if someone
> is using a better algorithm for the NEXT and STEP commands:
>
> Our gdb's single stepping is very slow. Current implementation (A)
> (Note: applies, in general, to all platforms, not just to arm):
> 1- restore user installed breakpoints
> 2- command to single step.
> 3- ack and set temp breakpoint(s).
> For arm, sets two temp breakpoints on branches and function calls;
> one at the destination and one at next instruction. These cover
> conditional execution either way it may go.
> 4- exception signal
> 5- remove breakpoints
> 6- collect regs to see where we are.
> 7- if still between start addr and stop addr, repeat,
> if == stop addr: stop
> 8 - if in another function, determine return addr and
> set breakpoint there
> 9 - continue
> 10 - go to 4
>
> When it could be more efficient, simpler, and more robust to do B:
> 1- restore user installed breakpoints
> 2- set a temp breakpoint at stop addr
> 3 - continue
> 4- exception signal
> 5- collect regs and display where we are
>
> Is anyone out there using a more efficient algorithm similar to B?
> Also, is anyone using hardware single-stepping or hardware-assisted
> stepping? For which platforms?
>
> Thank you much for your help,
>
> Wendy Peikes
> Cisco Systems
> Software Tools Group
> GDB Support
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-28 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-27 14:05 Wendy Peikes
2002-09-27 17:44 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D94FB80.4030201@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=wendyp@cisco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox