This is the mail archive of the gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com 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]

gdb/332: watch is finicky about giving a hardware watchpoint



>Number:         332
>Category:       gdb
>Synopsis:       watch is finicky about giving a hardware watchpoint
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Feb 02 14:48:01 PST 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     Dru
>Release:        gdb 5.1.1
>Organization:
>Environment:
linux 2.2.16 (patched with jcrown debug register patches)
x86
>Description:
When I set a watch to a named variable, gdb will create a 
'hardware watchpoint'. However if I issue:
'watch 0x81d79a8' gdb creates a software watchpoint. 
This is annoying since I'm debugging after a segmentation
violation and I need to re-run the program to see who is
writing to that memory. 

Why isn't this a valid expression to create a hardware
watchpoint that doesn't rely on variable scope?
>How-To-Repeat:
Run any program. Create a watch on a memory address.
It will not create a hardware watchpoint.
>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:


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