From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3990 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2002 18:13:20 -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 3949 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2002 18:13:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO TheWorld.com) (199.172.62.104) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jan 2002 18:13:19 -0000 Received: from shell.TheWorld.com (root@shell01.TheWorld.com [199.172.62.241]) by TheWorld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14571; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:13:18 -0500 Received: from localhost (qqi@localhost) by shell.TheWorld.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA8595060; Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:13:18 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: shell01.TheWorld.com: qqi owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:13:00 -0000 From: Quality Quorum To: Andrew Cagney cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: software single step - feature request In-Reply-To: <3C445705.6070607@cygnus.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00161.txt.bz2 On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > There are a few nits associated with soft single step support, which are > > easy to work around but annoying enough to justify a fix. > > > Your not alone. This is taken from gdbarch.sh: > > ... So, there is a hope then that it will be implemented one day. I am wondering, whether all items below will see the light one day ? > > 1. Soft single step is configured per platform (e.g. arm-wince has one > > and generic arm does not), IMHO, it should be provided on per CPU > > basis. > > > > 2. It has to be provided for every CPU - may be as part of multi-arch > > transition. > > > > 3. It should be run-time configurable - so it should be possible to > > use the same gdb image both with and without soft single step. > > > > 4. If target supports hw single step it should be possible to configure > > removal of breakpoints before stepping. > > see gdb/120 I am sorry I am not that deeply involved into gdb development. > > > Thanks, Aleksey