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: [patch/rfc] Eliminate TARGET_HAS_HARDWARE_WATCHPOINTS


On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 06:17:38PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:28:26 -0400
> > From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> > 
> > Can you give an example - a target with no watchpoint support that no 
> > longer builds due to my patch?
> 
> I don't think it is my job to find such a target.  Rather, it is up to
> you to prove that no target will ever need that.
> 
> Anyway, I don't think this kind of approach to our argument is
> productive.  I suggest that we instead concentrate on finding an
> alternative machinery to compute TARGET_HAS_HARDWARE_WATCHPOINTS at
> configure time.
> 
> How about this: for a cross-compiled build or for remote targets, add
> a switch to the configure script, say --without-hw-watchpoints, that
> will set TARGET_HAS_HARDWARE_WATCHPOINTS so as to disable hardware
> watchpoint support; for native and non-cross builds, add an autoconf
> test that will do that automatically?

Why should the macro matter for remote targets?  We should ask the
target whether watchpoints are available.

For cross-compiled build, autoconf should work just fine.  Compile
tests are still available and you shouldn't be using run tests for this
sort of thing anyway.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz


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