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]

Re: Patch for gdb5.0; enable hardware watchpoints on UnixWare


   Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12:10:42 -0500 (EST)
   From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@delorie.com>

   > > While I generalize the code, I will bring it up to date with the letter
   > > of Intel's manuals.
   > 
   > So you're going to have your own defines for DR_... and not use the
   > system ones?  I guess that was why your code didn't match up to what
   > I find in sys/debugreg.h on my system.

   I was unaware of sys/debugreg.h until now.  Is it present on all Unix
   x86-based systems?  If not, we will need some configury magic to
   handle this.

   DJGPP certainly doesn't have sys/debugreg.h, and I don't know how
   about Cygwin.

   What do people think about relative merits of using sys/debugreg.h vs
   having the definitions inside GDB (or both)?

Forget about sys/debugreg.h.  Some Linux systems have it, some don't.
And any dependency on target-specific header files is a PITA when
building a cross-debugger.  IMHO having definitions inside GDB that
match the Intel documentation is probably the best thing to do.  I
don't think that the layout of the debug registers differs between any
x86 targets.  Any differences in register numbering should be
addressed by the system-dependcent layer, and any native version of
that code could use sys/debugreg.h if it wants.

Mark

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