This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@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]

Re: Display of read/access watchpoints when HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT


> My experience was that the old code worked if you had only a
> watchpoint active, but it would produce the wrong results if you had
> both watchpoints and breakpoints active.  The reason was that the scan
> for matching break/watch points would conclude that the target break
> had happened due to a non-matching watchpoint and would proceed,
> rather than break.

But this error scenario should only apply to read/access watchpoints,
never write watchpoints.  A write watchpoint should never be misdetected ...

> That doesn't seem like a good idea.  Why would it be reasonable to
> treat the two differently?

Because a write watchpoints can be handled without hardware support to
provide the address, while read/access watchpoints fundamentally
cannot be.

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  weigand@informatik.uni-erlangen.de


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