This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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: [try 3rd] arm_pc_is_thumb takes displaced stepping into account

From: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
To: Matthew Gretton-Dann <matthew dot gretton-dann at arm dot com>
Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:13:45 -0600
Subject: Re: [try 3rd] arm_pc_is_thumb takes displaced stepping into account
References: <4D0F0ABA.9010506@codesourcery.com> <201012200804.oBK84oPu005379@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <4D0F5D36.2040909@codesourcery.com> <4D10D377.8080100@codesourcery.com> <20101223042236.GS2596@adacore.com> <4D12F3A8.3020102@codesourcery.com> <4D2D27F2.7050303@codesourcery.com> <1294931747.9907.137.camel@e102319-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

On 01/13/2011 09:15 AM, Matthew Gretton-Dann wrote:

I agree with Ulrich, and prefer this latest patch to your previous ones
- but I am still not 100% happy with it, as I think it would be better
not to need anything from infrun.c at all here.

Agree. The perfect situation is that we need nothing from infrun.c in tdep.

What could be done instead is to have the displaced stepping routines
maintain a list of the areas of memory that are being used as scratch
space, and the instruction set state of the instructions in those areas.

Then arm_pc_is_thumb should check this list to see if the PC falls into
one of these areas, and return the appropriate value.

That sounds good. Again, thanks for your inputs.

--
Yao Qi

References:
- [try 3rd] arm_pc_is_thumb takes displaced stepping into account
  - From: Yao Qi
- Re: [try 3rd] arm_pc_is_thumb takes displaced stepping into account
  - From: Matthew Gretton-Dann

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