From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30778 invoked by alias); 19 Oct 2018 13:35:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 30761 invoked by uid 89); 19 Oct 2018 13:35:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=stepping, Hx-languages-length:1133 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:35:45 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 448853006027; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:35:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4992E61D17; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: gdb ignoring vCont supported commands To: Bill Morgan References: <0eeb55ca-d4e1-4db4-e601-74ca7e1151e2@redhat.com> <11b018ef2ea200e314dbce95f424eb6c@polymtl.ca> Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <818ac329-32b3-219d-ad28-11a7961b24ad@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:35:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 On 10/18/2018 02:42 PM, Bill Morgan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 4:12 PM Pedro Alves wrote: > >> On 10/09/2018 09:29 PM, Bill Morgan wrote: >>> >>> So it is now recognizing the vContSupported, but it is still sending >>> vCont;s >>> >> >> Argh, I forgot that this only really works on ARM GNU/Linux. >> What is your target? >> >> We're missing the small infrastructure change in GDB >> mentioned in the discussion I linked before. >> > > I couldn't get the change on the other thread to work, What change do you mean? > but this has been > reported before and a patch submitted to fix it. > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21272 > > I only needed this portion of the patch to get it working. > > Any chance on getting it merged to master? > No, sorry -- that would make gdb always use software single-step, even if the stub/probe supports hw stepping. Not sure about the arm_get_next_pcs_syscall_next_pc change, but I suppose that it helps with most syscalls. See . Thanks, Pedro Alves