From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10969 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2013 07:34:24 -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 10955 invoked by uid 89); 22 Jul 2013 07:34:24 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS,TW_EG autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-oa0-f44.google.com) (209.85.219.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:23 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id l10so8661845oag.31 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:34:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.60.99.42 with SMTP id en10mr25475071oeb.85.1374478455977; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:34:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.116.101 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:33:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51ECDF5D.6010207@codesourcery.com> References: <20130722063842.GA24373@host2.jankratochvil.net> <51ECDF5D.6010207@codesourcery.com> From: Hui Zhu Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 07:34:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Reverse debugging for arm baremetal targets? To: Yao Qi Cc: Jan Kratochvil , Terry Guo , gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 07/22/2013 02:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >> >> But the OS dependent part seems to be missing there: >> arm-tdep.h: >> /* Parse swi insn args, sycall record. */ >> int (*arm_swi_record) (struct regcache *regcache); >> - which does not seem to be set anywhere >> > > I raised this question during the code review, and Oza (the author) wanted > to do them in phase 3, which handles OS related stuff, such as syscall. > What we have in trunk is phase 2. > > >> So the current set_gdbarch_process_record initialization could be possib= ly >> moved to arm-tdep.c. But I did not play more with it. > > > Right, the existing Oza's work in trunk is about ARM reversed debugging, > without OS stuff. Probably we should call set_gdbarch_process_record in > arm-tdep.c, but not sure how good or bad the results are. I think you should call it arm process record but not reverse debug. Reverse debug depend on the target support but I don't think call prec as reverse debug is right. Thanks, Hui > > -- > Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)