Re: [patch 0/4] hw watchpoints across fork() + multi-inf

[Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>]

On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 22:24:41 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Monday 06 December 2010 11:11:35, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > this is an Archer branch
> > 	archer-jankratochvil-watchpoint3
> > being posted here since 2007 and (different impl.) present in Fedora:
> > 	[patch] Fix disarmed hw watchpoints after inferior's fork()
> > 	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-10/msg00367.html
[...]
> I'm trying to look at this series, and it looks like how gdbserver
> has been made to support watchpoints was overlooked,

My per-TID implementation was posted in 2007.  I have even updated it
according to the review but it got unreplied (I did not ping it, though).

Doug Evan's multi-inferior implementation was posted first in 2009:
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-04/msg00804.html

If we want to start talking about "overlooking" it happened the opposite way.
I do not mind wrt the patch, but I do not agree with your wording.


>  - gdbserver already has a per-process structure for the debug registers,
>    yet, your implementation is different, which makes it gratuitously harder
>    to share and move code between the gdb and gdbserver implementations.
> 
>    (FYI, we've written patches that move shareable bits of
>     gdb and gdbserver into common/, seeding the way to such duplication
>     removal.  we should be posting them in the foreseeable future)

What is the status of these existing common/ unifications?

Considering syncing back linux-nat to gdbserver (as Doug did not post it as
a two pieces series - (1) sync gdbserver to linux-nat (2) extend it in
gdbserver) first as a base for this patchset.  But I may create by such
linux-nat sync something already obsoleted by your existing non-public
patches.


Thanks,
Jan