On 16/2/22 7:38 am, Kinsey Moore wrote:
> It is possible to remove software breaks without actually restoring the
> original instruction to memory. When this happens, the original
> instruction is lost.
Should this
> This ensures that when a software break is removed,
> its original instruction is restored.
be...
This ensures a software break is removed and the original instruction is
restored.
?
> ---
> cpukit/libdebugger/rtems-debugger-target.c | 16
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cpukit/libdebugger/rtems-debugger-target.c
> b/cpukit/libdebugger/rtems-debugger-target.c
> index 04b274909b..c298a62357 100644
> --- a/cpukit/libdebugger/rtems-debugger-target.c
> +++ b/cpukit/libdebugger/rtems-debugger-target.c
> @@ -191,6 +191,22 @@ rtems_debugger_target_swbreak_control(bool insert,
> uintptr_t addr, DB_UINT kind)
> if (loc == swbreaks[i].address) {
>size_t remaining;
>if (!insert) {
> +if (target->breakpoint_size > 4)
> + memcpy(loc, swbreaks[i].contents, target->breakpoint_size);
> +else {
> + switch (target->breakpoint_size) {
> + case 4:
> +loc[3] = swbreaks[i].contents[3];
> + case 3:
> +loc[2] = swbreaks[i].contents[2];
> + case 2:
> +loc[1] = swbreaks[i].contents[1];
> + case 1:
> +loc[0] = swbreaks[i].contents[0];
> +break;
> + }
> +}
> +rtems_debugger_target_cache_sync(&swbreaks[i]);
> --target->swbreaks.level;
> remaining = (target->swbreaks.level - i) * swbreak_size;
> memmove(&swbreaks[i], &swbreaks[i + 1], remaining);
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
