From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21587 invoked by alias); 20 May 2005 22:11:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21469 invoked from network); 20 May 2005 22:11:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 20 May 2005 22:11:17 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4KMBH1u018833 for ; Fri, 20 May 2005 18:11:17 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j4KMBGO01625; Fri, 20 May 2005 18:11:17 -0400 Received: from [172.16.24.50] (bluegiant.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4KMBEa8013507; Fri, 20 May 2005 18:11:15 -0400 Message-ID: <428E6081.70602@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 22:11:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird (X11/20050322) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: schlie@comcast.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [discuss] Support for reverse-execution Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00248.txt.bz2 >>> or presume the intelligence need be "remote" to GDB; >> >> We're not doing that either -- the user interface makes no >> assumption about the target interface. > > - Then there seems no need to define a reverse-xxxx set of commands > at the GDB/target-stub boundary (unless I misunderstand the purposed > of the earlier threads of dialog)? The user interface makes no *assumption* about the target interface, but that doesn't mean that the target doesn't *also* need an interface. Both have been discussed in this thread, but they're not tied together. We have, for instance, discussed six or seven user commands (not counting bookmarks), but AFAIK only two target interface commands should be needed to support them -- "rc/bc" and "rs/bs". There's a third interface we've discussed too -- the interface between core-gdb and the target or back-end component (eg. but not limited to remote.c). We might, for instance, add a single new method to the target vector, eg. "to_resume_backwards" (or we might just add a direction parameter to the existing one). That method could then be added to, for instance, target sim. All that said, I'm not taking issue with your idea. I do think there might be a generic way for gdb to do something like dropping a checkpoint. I just don't think its mutually exclusive with this discussion. If you want to propose it in a separate thread, I'd be thrilled to talk about it.