This is the mail archive of the gdb@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: Using reverse execution


Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 07:00:27 -0700
From: Stan Shebs <shebs@apple.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com

it's clear that a full-blown handles-every-situation implementation
will require a huge amount of kernel hacking in addition to the GDB
part. I don't want to get into a situation like that of tracepoints,
where the feature ultimately falls by the wayside because it's too
narrow in applicability and implementation.


What features can be implemented without hacking the kernel?


If you limited reversing to designated regions, and single-stepped
every instruction in the range, collected the exact data changes
(by disassembling the instructions) and only allowed examination
rather than re-executing from any given point, all that just needs
existing GDB machinery. Is it useful? At least somebody thinks so,
because I just described how the omniscient debugger works (using
Java bytecodes instead of machine instructions).

Stan


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