This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Refactor doc on stop notification.
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:46:01 +0800
> From: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
> CC: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
>
> Here is a real rsp traffic on notification Stop.
>
> <- %Stop:T0505:98e7ffbf;04:4ce6ffbf;08:b1b6e54c;thread:p7526.7526;core:0;
> ....
> -> vStopped
> <- T0505:68f37db7;04:40f37db7;08:63850408;thread:p7526.7528;core:0;
> -> vStopped
> <-T0505:68e3fdb6;04:40e3fdb6;08:63850408;thread:p7526.7529;core:0;
> -> vStopped
> <- OK
Thanks, this explains quite a bit.
> How about the new version?
It's OK, after you take care of a few remaining problems:
> +See @xref{Notification Packets}.
Just "@xref", without the "See" part. @xref already generates a "See".
> +Each notification is composed by three parts:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"comprised of three parts"
> +Otherwise, @value{GDBN} must be prepared to receive a
I would delete the "Otherwise" part. I don't think it adds anything
to the text.
> +If the stub receives a @var{ack} packet and there are no
> +additional stop events to report, the stub shall return an @samp{OK}
> +response. At this point, @value{GDBN} has finished processing a
> +notification and the stub has completed sending any queued events.
> +@value{GDBN} ignores additional notifications received before this
> +point. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Before" or "after"? If "before" is correct, then I don't think I
understand what this paragraph wants to tell.
> +The process of asynchronous notification can be illustrated by the
> +following example:
> +@smallexample
> +<- @code{%name:event}
> +@code{...}
> +-> @code{ack}
> +<- @code{event}
> +-> @code{ack}
> +<- @code{event}
> +-> @code{ack}
> +<- @code{OK}
> +@end smallexample
I would suggest to consider putting here a real example, like the one
you used to explain the issue to me.
OK with those changes.
Thanks.