This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Patch for gdb5.0; enable hardware watchpoints on UnixWare
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
- Subject: Re: Patch for gdb5.0; enable hardware watchpoints on UnixWare
- From: Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:21:12 -0800
- CC: john at Calva dot COM, Peter dot Schauer at Regent dot E-Technik dot TU-Muenchen dot DE, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
- References: <NCBBLMGKIKDGJMEOMNMEEEDMHEAA.john@Calva.COM> <200010310906.EAA21817@indy.delorie.com>
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: "John Hughes" <john@Calva.COM>
> > Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:11:58 +0100
> > > But all the i386v4-nat.c code has to be conditionalized on
> > > UNIXWARE (or better yet, moved to a new i386sco-nat.c file), as
> > > i386v4-nat.c is used by x86 Solaris as well, and Solaris uses page
> > > faulting instead of debug registers for watchpoints, and would not
> > > compile with your patches installed.
> > Aha. Here's a fixed version of the patch; the i386v4-nat.c changes
> > are conditional on UNIXWARE.
> Note that I'm working on a unified watchpoint implementation for all
> ia32 targets, based on the code written for the DJGPP port (see
> go32-nat.c). This implementation will allow to watch large areas (up
> to 16 bytes) and debug register sharing via reference counts (required
> for watching overlapping areas) on all ia32 platforms.
> I am trying to make this happen for v5.1, so perhaps changes like this
> one should be witheld and not committed, at least until we decide that
> I'm not living up to my promises.
Is there a reason for them to be withheld?