Re: Leaving visible breakpoints in memory/core (Was: Breakpoint stepping)

[Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>]

Mark Wielaard wrote:
> But if you really wanted to then you could at least get the breakpoints
> instructions that frysk-core inserted from BreakpointAddresses (which I
> will soon extend with a handy getAllAdresses() method for fixing bug
> #4761), and then you can get the actual breakpoint instruction bytes
> used from the relevant Isa getBreakpointInstruction(). This is probably
> too low level though. And since you cannot guarantee that the created
> core file is read back through frysk (someone could be using gdb!) I
> don't know where you would actually put this information or how you
> would make all consumers know about both the original bytes and the
> breakpoint instructions in the image.
>   

What's the argument about just dumping the task's memory as is, with all 
breakpoints there? A corefile is a representation of that process and 
it's thread as it is at that time ...

And besides, this is only addressing a tiny corner case of someone 
running fcore on a process that is being debugged with Frysk at that 
time. I can't think of a scenario why I would do that. Can you? If they 
were debugging with GDB and fcore was run on that process, the included 
core image would have all the break point information.

It seems like a lot of work for a very small edge case?

Regards

Phil