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 2/2] Enable range stepping for ARM on GDBServer

Pedro Alves writes:

> On 09/01/2016 04:21 PM, Antoine Tremblay wrote:
>> Pedro Alves writes:
>>> On 08/31/2016 08:14 PM, Antoine Tremblay wrote:
>>>> I'm sorry I can't be more helpful at the moment but I wanted to post
>>>> this issue before I have to leave for a while.
>>> Understood.  Does enabling range stepping unblock something else?
>> It would unblock ARM tracepoints, as per Yao's requirements...
> Tracepoints make gdbserver single-step and then not report the event
> to gdb, so I do see the parallel with range-stepping.  Throwing
> while-stepping into the equation would make it even more clear.
> But maybe we can paralyze?  If enabling tracepoints without range
> stepping causes no known regression, but enabling range stepping with
> no tracepoints causes regressions, seems to me like we could put
> tracepoints in first, and fix whatever range stepping problems
> in parallel.

I would totally agree with that. (tracepoints do not cause any
regressions without range stepping)

Yao ?

> Skipping the test sounds far from ideal to me, since the test has a
> tendency of catching problems.  Witness patch 1/2 in this very
> series, for example...



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