Getting the i386 watchpoints into the taget vector?
Andrew Cagney
ac131313@ges.redhat.com
Fri Sep 20 16:51:00 GMT 2002
>> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 21:57:40 -0400
>> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
>>
>> Instead of using a system interface, the i386 manipulates the
>> hardware watchpoint registers directly.
>
>
> Really? What I see is that most i386 ports use ptrace or similar
> interfaces to access the hardware watchpoints. So in what sense is
> this manipulation ``direct''?
(Probably bad choice of words).
GDB can implement watchpoints, for a remote target, using two mechanism:
- sending the remote target the watchpoint request (the Z packet) and
let the remote target implement the details
- manipulate the h/w watchpoint registers directly, sending the remote
target register read/write operations - what I believe i386-nat.c does.
The native equivalents are roughly:
- use some sort of custom h/w watchpoint kernel interface
- use ptrace(PT_GETREGS) / ptrace (PT_SETREGS)
>> One thought is to change the config/i386/nm-i386.h macros to something
>> native specific (native_insert_watchpoint()) and then have the various
>> native targets (infptrace.c, ...) add these methods to their target vector.
>>
>> It does restrict things to native targets. A remote target couldn't
>> make use of GDB's built-in knowledge of watchpoint registers.
>>
>> Another (less well thought out) idea, is for the target stack, to fall
>> back to the ``native watchpoint'' mechanism when the [remote] target
>> doesn't support watchpoints. I think this would mean putting the
>> ``native watchpoint'' methods in the architecture vector where the
>> target vector code could call it.
>
>
> Why not simply allow remote targets define the watchpoint-related
> macros? Let their definitions issue remote packets that will cause
> the target end DTRT. As long as the target is a i386-compatible
> machine, the internal bookkeeping we have in the current code will
> work.
I'm not sure what you mean here. If we used macro's then they would run
afowl of trying to make everything multi-arch.
Andrew
PS: Someone should implement the equivalent sim commands. sim/common
has a watchpoint framework. Just needs the sim<->gdb interface.
More information about the Gdb
mailing list