From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:14:58 +0100 (BST) Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:804 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20022454AbXFDPO4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:14:56 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.248] (unknown [10.150.0.9]) by imap.sh.mvista.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F803EC9; Mon, 4 Jun 2007 08:14:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <46642CA9.20103@ru.mvista.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 19:15:53 +0400 From: Sergei Shtylyov Organization: MontaVista Software Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: ru, en-us, en-gb MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ralf Baechle Cc: Atsushi Nemoto , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unify watch.S and remove arch/mips/lib-{32,64} References: <20070605.000239.31638706.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20070604151048.GA30128@linux-mips.org> In-Reply-To: <20070604151048.GA30128@linux-mips.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 15235 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: sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Hello. Ralf Baechle wrote: >>Unify lib-{32,64}/watch.S into lib/watch.S and remove lib-{32,64} >>completely. >>The old 64-bit __watch_set() expected an physical address and the old >>32-bit __watch_set() expected a KSEG0 virtual address. The new >>unified __watch_set() is based on the 64-bit one. Since there is no >>real user of the __watch_set(), this incompatibility would not cause >>any problem. > 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. Watchpoints *could* be supported as part of KGDB, BTW. > Ralf WBR, Sergei