Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: non-decr_pc_after_break i386 targets
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:33:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <412BA5C3.9020102@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200408141934.i7EJY4mc001084@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>

> While reading the Solaris proc(4) man page I noticed the PR_BPTADJ
> flag.  If this flag is set, Solaris x86 "will adjust the program
> counter back to location of the breakpointed instructions when the lwp
> stops on a breakpoint".  The man page explicitly says that on SPARC
> this is a no-op.  Using this flag makes it possible to turn
> i386-*-solaris2* into an architecture where decr_pc_after_break is
> zero.  This would have remove some of the problems with breakpoints in
> signal trampolines on Solaris x86.  So I think we should do that.
> 
> However, this also reveals a flaw in the way we handle
> decr_pc_after_break.  Currently it's part of the architecture vector,
> which essentially means that we consider it part of the ISA.  However,
> the above shows that it also depends on the target interface.  So it
> seems we should make it possible for the target vector to override the
> default set by the architecture vector.
> 
> To people agree with this analysis?

The same problem pattern occures with software_single_step - the 
archititecture is incorrectly dictating the presence/absence of hardware 
single-step.

Both of these cases are used in infrun.c.  I think, in both cases, the 
logic should read something like:

	if (!target_has_<feature>_p ())
		gdb_assert (gdbarch_<feature-workaround>_p())
		use gdbarch_feature_workaround

Andrew



      parent reply	other threads:[~2004-08-24 20:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-14 19:34 Mark Kettenis
2004-08-14 19:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-08-16 18:59 ` Kevin Buettner
2004-08-24 20:33 ` 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=412BA5C3.9020102@gnu.org \
    --to=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
    /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