[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/5] gdbstub: gdb pass-through qemu monitor support

[Jan Kiszka]

Jason Wessel wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Jason Wessel wrote:
>>   
>>> Maxim Gorbachyov wrote:
>>>     
>>>> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Jason Wessel
>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [cut]
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>>>> Seems reasonable too, see newly attached patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously you need the new monitor patch applied prior to this one.
>>>>> This patch was updated against the prior patch.
>>>>>     
>>>>>         
>>>> It was noticed [by Jan Kiszka and me] that the output on the monitor
>>>> console goes both to the local as well as the remote one - but only if
>>>> you issue a command via gdb. When you type in the command locally (ie.
>>>> on the qemu side), that output is not forwarded to the gdb frontend.
>>>> Is this behavior desired?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>> That was certainly the intended behavior when I created the patch. 
>>> There is no reason to feed the monitor output up to the debugger that
>>> may or may not be attached.
>>>     
>> That's not what we were confused by.
>>
>>   
>>>  The behavior could get altered to check if
>>> the debugger is in the "continue" state and then send the information
>>> from the monitor, but it seemed of little value to do so.
>>>     
>> Rather the contrary: What is the point of mirroring the output you see
>> in gdb to the local monitor console?
>>
>>   
> 
> That happens to have little to do with the gdb implementation.  It is a
> function of the monitor mux.  The monitor mux always writes out to all
> the output channels automatically.   In the case of gdb sending input
> for which you only want to receive the response it would be plausible to
> add a "focus" parameter to the monitor mux code to indicate which
> "channel" to send the output to.
> 
> The monitor mux could also be changed to simply shift the output focus
> to the most recent place it received an input, and if the focus was -1
> to start it would broadcast every where, the way it does today.  It is a
> trivial enough change, if this is what you are looking for.

Yep, would be nice.

Jan

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature