On 09/22, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > oleg wrote: > > > [...] Honestly, I don't really know how do the "right thing" here. > > Anyway, most probably this code will be changed. Like ptrace, ugdb > > uses ->report_syscall_exit() to synthesize a trap. Unlike ptrace, > > ugdb_report_signal() doesn't send SIGTRAP to itself but reports > > SIGTRAP using siginfo_t we have. In any case, whatever we do, > > multiple tracers can confuse each other. > > (It seems to me that a pure gdb report, without a synthetic > self-injected SIGTRAP, should be fine.)
What do you mean? > > Next: fully implement g/G/p/P, currently I am a bit confused... > > But what about features? [...] > > You could dig out the old "fishing plan". One demonstrated > improvement was from simulating (software) watchpoints within the > gdb stub, instead of having gdb fall back to issing countless > single-steps with memory-fetch inquiries in between. When I do 'watch', gdb sends '$Z2'. I am a bit confused, iirc it was decided I shouldn't play with Z packets now. But I won't argue. Oleg.