On 5 October 2014 23:07, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014, 22:48:05 schrieb Peter Maydell:
>> On 5 October 2014 22:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> > On 5 October 2014 22:00, Michael Walle wrote:
>> >> I can confirm that your patch makes qemu stop one instruction earlier.
>> >> With
Am Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014, 22:48:05 schrieb Peter Maydell:
> On 5 October 2014 22:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 5 October 2014 22:00, Michael Walle wrote:
> >> I can confirm that your patch makes qemu stop one instruction earlier.
> >> Without your patch the program is stopped at (3). With yo
On 5 October 2014 22:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 5 October 2014 22:00, Michael Walle wrote:
>> I can confirm that your patch makes qemu stop one instruction earlier.
>> Without
>> your patch the program is stopped at (3). With your patch applied the program
>> is stopped at (2). But I guess th
On 5 October 2014 22:00, Michael Walle wrote:
> i've tested your patch on the lm32 target.
>
> My test program was like the following:
>
> mvhi r1, hi(0x1000)
> ori r1, r1, lo(0x1000)
> nop
> nop
> nop
> nop
> sw (r1+0), r0 ; (1) store some value to 0x1000
> nop; (2)
> nop
Am Freitag, 12. September 2014, 19:04:17 schrieb Peter Maydell:
> GDB assumes that watchpoint set via the gdbstub remote protocol will
> behave in the same way as hardware watchpoints for the target. In
> particular, whether the CPU stops with the PC before or after the insn
> which triggers the wa
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Max Filippov wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> On 15 September 2014 20:59, Max Filippov wrote:
>>> I've tested xtensa part and have noticed no difference with or without
>>> this patch:
>>> gdb connected to qemu gdbstub always s
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 07:04:17PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> GDB assumes that watchpoint set via the gdbstub remote protocol will
> behave in the same way as hardware watchpoints for the target. In
> particular, whether the CPU stops with the PC before or after the insn
> which triggers the wat
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 15 September 2014 20:59, Max Filippov wrote:
>> I've tested xtensa part and have noticed no difference with or without
>> this patch:
>> gdb connected to qemu gdbstub always stops right after the watched
>> instruction.
>> I guess that w
On 15 September 2014 20:59, Max Filippov wrote:
> I've tested xtensa part and have noticed no difference with or without
> this patch:
> gdb connected to qemu gdbstub always stops right after the watched
> instruction.
> I guess that without this patch I should have seen gdb stopping not right
>
Hi Peter,
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> GDB assumes that watchpoint set via the gdbstub remote protocol will
> behave in the same way as hardware watchpoints for the target. In
> particular, whether the CPU stops with the PC before or after the insn
> which triggers the
GDB assumes that watchpoint set via the gdbstub remote protocol will
behave in the same way as hardware watchpoints for the target. In
particular, whether the CPU stops with the PC before or after the insn
which triggers the watchpoint is target dependent. Allow guest CPU
code to specify which beha
11 matches
Mail list logo
