Re: [PATCH/doc] Remove fixme of packet "k"

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 03/20/2014 03:44 AM, Hui Zhu wrote:

>   @item k
>   @cindex @samp{k} packet
> -Kill request.
> +Kill the target process or processes.
>   
> -FIXME: @emph{There is no description of how to operate when a specific
> -thread context has been selected (i.e.@: does 'k' kill only that
> -thread?)}.
> +The exact effect of this packet is not specified.  For a single-process
> +target, it will kill that process if possible.

This is looking good to me too, but I'd like to suggest further
extending it some.  As is I think this may leave bare metal stub
developers wondering what does "kill the single-process target"
means.  I'd leave the "Kill request" title unmodified.  I'd
suggest using "may" instead of "will".  I think we should mention
that even not replying an ack is OK.  So here's my suggestion:

@item k
@cindex @samp{k} packet
Kill request.

The exact effect of this packet is not specified.

For a bare-metal target, it may power cycle or reset the target
system.  For that reason, the @samp{k} packet has no reply.

For a single-process target, it may kill that process if possible.

A multiple-process target may choose to kill just one process, or all
that are under GDB's control.  For more precise control, use the vKill
packet (@pxref{vKill packet}).

If the target system immediately closes the connection in response to
@samp{k}, @value{GDBN} does not consider the lack of packet
acknowledgment to be an error, and assumes the kill was successful.

If connected using @kbd{target extended-remote}, and the target does
not close the connection in response to a kill request, @value{GDBN}
probes the target state as if a new connection was opened (pxfer to
the status/"?" packet here).

> +
> +A multiple-process target may choose to kill just one process, or all
> +that are under GDB's control.  For more precise control, use the

( Should be @value{GDBN}. )

-- 
Pedro Alves