This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at valinux dot com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 10:18:37 -0800
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <200009070855.EAA00749@albacore> <200009070855.EAA00749@albacore> <200009071500.LAA07756@indy.delorie.com> <200009081529.e88FTjx15960@debye.wins.uva.nl> <200102101533.KAA10417@indy.delorie.com>
On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 10:33:52AM -0500, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> unsigned int HWBP_GET_STATUS (int pid);
> This macro returns the value of the DR6 debug status register from
> the inferior.
> In the discussion we had back in September, Mark said that the
> status register should be per thread. Does that mean that we need
> an additional argument (int tid?) to pass to HWBP_GET_STATUS? If
> so, how will this argument get into the i386_hwbp_* functions which
> will call these macros?
What is the difference between pid and tid in this case? Can we derive
tid from pid?
> Or maybe the target end can figure out the thread id by itself with
> some TIDGET(pid) magic?
> Comments? Suggestions? Flames?
I haven't looked at it in detail. I guess Linux can live with the one
everyone agrees up on. If it turns out it is not true, I hope we can
still change it :-(. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to try it
out now. However, I will give it a try when the OS independent part is
checked in and noone is working on Linux.
H.J. Lu (email@example.com)