Re: [RFA] Displaced stepping just enable in non-stop mode

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Thursday 16 October 2008 19:25:13, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> Since we are prepared to decide that turning non-stop turns on
> displaced stepping, I understand that in most cases displaced stepping
> does work, which brings me to the conclusion that we could use
> displaced stepping even without non-stop.

The target itself could support stepping over breakpoints
without requiring us to use displaced stepping on the core
side.  DICOS falls in that category, I just haven't submitted
the patch yet to make the target report support for it (along with a
qSupported feature).  If the target doesn't report support for it, we
fallback to displaced stepping, and that requires gdbarch support.

> We could also try to detect if it works, and display a warning if we
> think it won't (RE the cases you described above).

That would be a warning that brings no value to the user in
all-stop mode.

If the user sees:

 "warning: you can not use displaced stepping on this platform".

He/she will think that something is wrong, while at least currently,
no functionality the user cares for is lost (in all-stop).

> > I'm not sure what else to call displaced stepping.  "Step around
> > breakpoints"?
> 
> The text mentions "out-of-line stepping", which sounds better to me.

I have no idea why "displaced stepping" was chosen in the first
place --- that pre-dates me.

-- 
Pedro Alves