This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] Support software single step on ARM in GDBServer.
- From: Antoine Tremblay <antoine dot tremblay at ericsson dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>, <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:35:13 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/10] Support software single step on ARM in GDBServer.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1448287968-12907-1-git-send-email-antoine dot tremblay at ericsson dot com> <1448287968-12907-9-git-send-email-antoine dot tremblay at ericsson dot com> <86ziy1vsdr dot fsf at gmail dot com> <5657213B dot 30504 at ericsson dot com> <56572D68 dot 90107 at gmail dot com> <56572E47 dot 9030306 at ericsson dot com> <56585E8B dot 1030104 at ericsson dot com> <5658739E dot 4060605 at gmail dot com>
On 11/27/2015 10:15 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
On 27/11/15 13:45, Antoine Tremblay wrote:
And I don't think it's good to have it in 2 calls, so I will have the
If so, let us keep collect_register_unsigned field.
Thus this refactoring would not simplify the patch and IMHO would create
some inconsistency why are we using regcache in some place for no
apparent gain while all the rest uses frame.
That is what I want to avoid... for the software single step routines
in two sides (GDB and GDBserver), I don't want to see that regcache is
used in one side while frame is used in the other side. regcache should
be used in both sides.
In light of this, I plan to keep it as is unless there's an objection ?
Sorry, I don't like the patch as is. I plan to change gdbarch method
software_single_step to something like this,
F:VEC (CORE_ADDR) *:software_single_step:struct regcache *regcache:regcache
it returns a set of address on which GDB can insert software single step
Alright as long as it's understood that the fields will stay, I'll do it