On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 16:07, Matheus Tavares Bernardino <quic_mathb...@quicinc.com> wrote: > > The GDB remote serial protocol[1] specifies that the communication > between GDB and the stub is driven by GDB: > > The host (GDB) sends commands, and the target (the debugging > stub incorporated in your program) sends a response. > > This is further emphasized by Embecosm's "Howto: GDB Remote Serial > Protocol" document[2], which says: > > This is the only circumstance under which the server sends a > packet: in reply to a packet from the client requiring a > response.
That document is 14 years old and is not a reliable reference for the protocol today... In particular, https://sourceware.org/gdb/download/onlinedocs/gdb/Notification-Packets.html says: "The GDB remote serial protocol includes notifications, packets that require no acknowledgment. Both the GDB and the stub may send notifications (although the only notifications defined at present are sent by the stub)." That said, the thing we're sending here isn't a notification, so it's not like we're in compliance with the protocol. So I guess I'm just saying the commit message could be improved. (The notification mechanism does allow notification of "we just stopped" if the stub implements non-stop mode, but we don't and it would be a real pain to try, so that's a bit of a red herring.) thanks -- PMM
