From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:43:01 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:42718 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20022483AbXFDPl5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:41:57 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l54FfalG030940; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:41:36 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l54FfaBF030939; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:41:36 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:41:36 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Atsushi Nemoto , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unify watch.S and remove arch/mips/lib-{32,64} Message-ID: <20070604154135.GA30296@linux-mips.org> References: <20070605.000239.31638706.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20070604151048.GA30128@linux-mips.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 15241 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 04:23:29PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > I think we can simply drop the entire watchpoint support. This was > > only ever working on R4000/R4400 and even there only somewhat useful > > for kernel debugging. So if we ever use watchpoint support I think > > something needs to be developed from scratch. > > A long-term plan is to make them available to userland through ptrace() > in a uniform way covering MIPS32/64 watchpoints as well for gdb and > suchlike. Sure, one of infinitly many things on the to do list. However the code we currently havee isn't very useful for that purpose. For maintenance sake it should rather be rewritten in C and it needs to learn about processors of the post R4400 era. Ralf