This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Unified watchpoints for x86 platforms
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:41:35 -0700
> From: Kevin Buettner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Is there any particular reason why you need the PID argument? AFAICS
> > it will always be equal to INFERIOR_PID, so I think we can do without
> > it. This is also true for the other i386_hwbp_* functions you're
> > proposing.
> I think it'd be better to not rely on ``inferior_pid''. I would
> rather see the explicitly passed. There will come a day when GDB
> is able to debug more than one process at a time and to perpetuate
> reliance on inferior pid would be short sighted.
I have two opposite opinions here. We need to resolve this somehow.
> I have read the rest of Eli's proposal as well as Mark's comments and
> I agree with the rest of Mark's remarks.
Thanks for the feedback.