On 08/11/06, Marcel Kilgus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correct. It doesn't know anything at all about i386 segmentation.
Well, that explains it then, I guess. In that case I don't really see
a clean solution for it.
If I understand the problem, the clean solution is having the
debugging
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Well, that explains it then, I guess. In that case I don't really see
a clean solution for it.
If I understand the problem, the clean solution is having the
debugging symbols at the right addresses: in code that runs with
paging enabled symbols should be at their
Assuming that breakpoint locations are indeed meant to be virtual
addresses, GDB would have to evaluate the CS descriptor, add the CS
base to the EIP address and THEN check whether it knows the address.
But as it seems to be segment-agnostic it doesn't do that and things
break as a result.
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I'd recommend the even simpler hack of having qemu report a PC that
included the segment base :-)
Probably sounds easier than it is, as seen the serial protocol doesn't
include the PC when a breakpoint fires. qemu would have to
intentionally report a wrong EIP the next
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 08:01:54PM +0100, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
Or do you mean that qemu should always and in all situations report an
adjusted EIP to GDB and re-adjust all EIPs it gets? Interesting idea,
but I guess that too would lead to dozens of other problems.
Yes precisely. I doubt it
/me wrote:
Having to always set them both in the high and low area is a bit
cumbersome to say the least. Any suggestion on what I'm missing or can
do to get breakpoints working properly again?
Okay, the QEMU source code was a lot more readable than I expected it
to be, so I had a look myself.
Fabrice Bellard wrote:
The breakpoints are set for a given virtual address. So IMHO testing
only the EIP value instead of EIP + CS.base is not logical...
That I just check for EIP is a convenience for me. The code is linked
to 0x0010 but moves itself to the virtual address 0xC010 (CS
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 12:33:05AM +0100, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
Leaving that aside, if I do set the breakpoint correctly at virtual
address (e.g.) 0xC0123456 qemu will (correctly I guess) cause an
exception for code offset 0x123456 (as CS base is 0xC000). GDB
however then doesn't recognize
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Leaving that aside, if I do set the breakpoint correctly at virtual
address (e.g.) 0xC0123456 qemu will (correctly I guess) cause an
exception for code offset 0x123456 (as CS base is 0xC000). GDB
however then doesn't recognize its own breakpoint as it only
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 12:57:29AM +0100, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Leaving that aside, if I do set the breakpoint correctly at virtual
address (e.g.) 0xC0123456 qemu will (correctly I guess) cause an
exception for code offset 0x123456 (as CS base is 0xC000). GDB
10 matches
Mail list logo
