This is the mail archive of the 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: [patch/rfc] Disable [eE] packets by default

> Andrew Cagney wrote:
>> Hello,
>> This is a followup to the current discussion regarding the [Ee] packets.
>> It disables them by default.
>> While it is a brutal solution to a problem, it is also 6 days before 5.2
>> branches.  It also clears the slate for another attempt at this.
>> Thoughts?
> I think this is the right thing to do.  Previously we had
> no way to test the 'e' packet.  Now that we do have, it is
> seen to be buggy.  This is like an unreliable optimization.
> You can give the user the opportunity to use it if he chooses, 
> but you don't turn it on by default.

It is in.  We're now free to figure out how to really make this work :-)

> I would like to start discussing the right way to implement this.
> For one thing, the current implementation has remote.c snatching
> control away from infrun, and doing something completely 
> different from what infrun asked it to do.  I'd like to have
> the decision about whether to use step-over-range made in
> infrun, not in the target layer.

Yes, definitly.  I suspect step-out-of-range is a special case of step. 
  I think the decision to try to use both should be made by infrun.c.

As RichardE recently re-discovered, the way single-step is structured is 
similarly wierd.  Fortunatly the consequences are not so bad.


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