This is the mail archive of the gdb@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: breakpoint for avr?



Ok, I added the BREAKPOINT_FROM_PC method for the avr and as I
suspected it doesn't interfere with remote targets (unless I am over
looking something):

Right. If the remote target doesn't support the Z packet, GDB will use BREAKPOINT_FROM_PC and then insert breakpoints in memory. Try
(gdb) b main
Breakpoint 1 at 0x104: file tst.c, line 34.

Do a:


(gdb) set remote Z-packet off

here. You'll then see GDB doing memory writes.

(gdb) c
Continuing.
Sending packet: $Z0,104,2#a9...Ack
Packet received: OK
Packet Z0 (software-breakpoint) is supported
Sending packet: $Hc0#db...Ack
Packet received:
Sending packet: $c#63...Ack
Packet received: T0520:02;21:ff10;22:04010000;
Sending packet: $g#67...Ack
Packet received: 00000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000001ff100a0102ff1004010000
Sending packet: $mfc,8#9a...Ack
Packet received: cfefd0e1debfcdbf
Sending packet: $z0,104,2#c9...Ack
Packet received: OK

Breakpoint 1, main () at tst.c:34
(gdb)


Andrew, does the attached patch help things with your patch? If so, I'll go ahead and commit it.

Yes, it will avoid the problem. My patch is at: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-05/msg00211.html

Andrew


2003-05-14 Theodore A. Roth <troth@openavr.org>

	* avr-tdep.c (avr_breakpoint_from_pc): New function.
	(avr_gdbarch_init): Set breakpoint_from_pc method.

Index: avr-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/avr-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.47
diff -u -p -r1.47 avr-tdep.c
--- avr-tdep.c 14 May 2003 20:09:14 -0000 1.47
+++ avr-tdep.c 14 May 2003 21:47:19 -0000
@@ -1091,6 +1091,18 @@ avr_push_arguments (int nargs, struct va
return sp;
}
+/* Not all avr devices support the BREAK insn. Those that don't should treat
+ it as a NOP. Thus, it should be ok. Since the avr is currently a remote
+ only target, this shouldn't be a problem (I hope). TRoth/2003-05-14 */
+
+const unsigned char *
+avr_breakpoint_from_pc (CORE_ADDR * pcptr, int *lenptr)
+{
+ static unsigned char avr_break_insn [] = { 0x95, 0x98 };
+ *lenptr = sizeof (avr_break_insn);
+ return avr_break_insn;
+}
+
/* Initialize the gdbarch structure for the AVR's. */
static struct gdbarch *
@@ -1189,6 +1201,7 @@ avr_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info in
set_gdbarch_inner_than (gdbarch, core_addr_lessthan);
set_gdbarch_decr_pc_after_break (gdbarch, 0);
+ set_gdbarch_breakpoint_from_pc (gdbarch, avr_breakpoint_from_pc);
set_gdbarch_function_start_offset (gdbarch, 0);
set_gdbarch_remote_translate_xfer_address (gdbarch,



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