This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: patch to add HAVE_CONTINUABLE_BREAKPOINT to target_ops


Ping.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
To: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>; "Andrew Cagney"
<ac131313@redhat.com>
Cc: <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: patch to add HAVE_CONTINUABLE_BREAKPOINT to target_ops


> Here's take 2 on the patch.  I had a slight error in the definition of
> HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT in the first one.  I was worried about
> initialization (since infrun.c wanted the default to be zero) but since
> target_ops structures are always declared as global data, it will be fine.
>
> cheers,
>
> Kris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> To: "Andrew Cagney" <ac131313@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Mark Kettenis" <kettenis@chello.nl>; <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:41 PM
> Subject: patch to add HAVE_CONTINUABLE_BREAKPOINT to target_ops
>
>
> > Probably easier if I just give a diff for you to comment on.
> >
> > Changelog Entry:
> >
> > 2003-02-11    Kris Warkentin    kewarken@qnx.com
> >
> >     * target.h: Add to_have_continuable_watchpoint to struct target_ops.
> >                     Initialize HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT.
> >     * target.c: update_current_target(): Add
> to_have_continuable_watchpoint.
> >     * infrun.c: remove initialization of HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT.
> >     * config/i386/nm-i386.h: Change HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT defines
to
> > 1.
> >     * config/i386/nm-i386sco5.h: ditto
> >     * config/i386/nm-i386sol2.h: ditto
> >     * config/s390/nm-linux.h: ditto
> >     * config/sparc/nm-sun4sol2.h: ditto
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Kris
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > To: "Andrew Cagney" <ac131313@redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Mark Kettenis" <kettenis@chello.nl>;
<gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:11 PM
> > Subject: Re: patch to add QNX NTO i386 support
> >
> >
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > Sorry it took so long to reply - I took a couple days to do a port of
a
> > > vxworks lib for a BSP we're working on.
> > >
> > > Question: can I make any assumption about the initialization of the
> > > target_ops vector?  It looks like infrun.c wants
> > HAVE_CONTINUABLE_BREAKPOINT
> > > to default to zero but I didn't see anywhere int target.[ch] that ops
> were
> > > being initialized.
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Kris
> > >
> > > > > /* After a watchpoint trap, the PC points to the instruction after
> > > > >> >    the one that caused the trap.  Therefore we don't need to
step
> > > over
> > > > >
> > > > > it.
> > > > >
> > > > >> >    But we do need to reset the status register to avoid another
> > trap.
> > > > >
> > > > > */
> > > > >
> > > > >> > #define HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINT
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hmm, this poses an interesting problem.  The other i386 targets
> have
> > > > >> this in their nm.h file, since they consider hardware watchpoints
> as
> > a
> > > > >> native-only feature.  However, this isn't necessarily right since
> we
> > > > >> might support hardware breakpoints via the remote protocol.  If
you
> > > > >> can live with the native-only approach, please move this to your
> nm.h
> > > > >> file.  Otherwise we might need to multi-arch this definition.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, file that under TODO along with the solib stuff.  We have
> > hardware
> > > > > breakpoints on all our remote targets that support them.
> > > >
> > > > Just FYI, this needs to be added to the target vector (target.h) and
> not
> > > > the architecture vector.
> > > >
> > > > For examples, see STOPPED_BY_WATCHPOINT et.al.  A bit of
manipulation
> of
> > > > the existing nm-*.h files will be needed - have them define the
value
> as
> > > 1.
> > > >
> > > > Can you please submit a separate patch that does just this.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]