This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC] Target-defined breakpoints [3/9] notification async
- From: Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Hui Zhu <hui_zhu at mentor dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 01:22:22 +0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Target-defined breakpoints [3/9] notification async
- References: <50880350.1040309@mentor.com> <50881981.7070308@codesourcery.com>
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 10/24/2012 11:03 PM, Hui Zhu wrote:
>>
>> This patch is the extend for the notification function.
>> Current notification function cannot handle the packet when GDB doesn't
>> want to send or receive packet from the remote target.
>> This patch do the extend make GDB can handle the notification even if it
>> doesn't send or receive packet.
>
>
> Looks we have two set of 'async notification' stuff here :) I am trying to
> set up an infrastructure of 'async notification' in gdb, so that other
> components can use it. Patches are here,
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-10/msg00404.html
> [RFC 0/7 V3]A general notification in GDB RSP
>
> It is general, not specific to any notifications, and scalable. We've
> probably have two internal cases of using it, 'trace status change' and
> 'stub/probe status change', so "Target-defined breakpoint" can use it easily
> as well.
>
> Do you mind if I suggest maintainers to review my 'async notification'
> patches first? Once they go in, we can rebase your patch on top of it. I
> am sure your patch will be shorter dramatically then. WDYT? Or if you find
> my 'async notification' doesn't meet your needs, let me know.
>
> --
> Yao
I don't mind change my patch according to your change if you can check in.
PS. I think target-defind xxx patches still have some work (format
and handler, please read the 0/9) not done. So please don't worry
about it.
Best,
Hui