This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Reverse debugging for arm baremetal targets?
- From: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Terry Guo <flameroc at gmail dot com>, Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>, <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:29:33 +0800
- Subject: Re: Reverse debugging for arm baremetal targets?
- References: <CAGbRaL4P+nYgwQZHQYGbAsoCGd--+0NyVzfL8+uOFdd51TVF1w at mail dot gmail dot com> <CANFwon0sYZbXVfFDSJF-LyretWZcPgUKyNSWJTsDosNH9t7iBw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAGbRaL4_DQ9fYXX8pj6x8rwXbMBsS7ZCi2D2jj_hSSvv-iZfdA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130722063842 dot GA24373 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net>
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 possibly
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.
--
Yao (éå)