Jay Lan wrote:
> Avi Nehori wrote:
>> i have done few testing and i noticed that :
>> 1. when you set an hardware break point to address XXXXX
>> and you do something like :
>> int * ptr = XXXXX;
>> *ptr = 9;
>> this will work .
>> 2. when you set an hardware break point to address XXXXX
>> int *ptr = XXXXX -4;
>> *(ptr + 4) =9;
>> didnt work.
>
> I have an easy-to-reproduce "fail to break on write" test case.
> But it seems to be a "direct" write though:
>
> At KDB prompt:
> KDB> bpha panic_on_oops
> ...
> KDB> go
>
>
> Then, at a shell window:
> # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/panic_on_oops
>
> The system will drop to the KDB prompt.
Oops, sorry. I meant to say: it will not break even though
the value has changed.
- jay
>
> Cheers,
> - jay
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> jidong xiao wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Avi Nehori <anehori@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> yes ,you are correct :)
>>>> seems like the debug registers are being set correctly(i have checked it
>>>> and
>>>> debugged it ),but still the breakpoint does not
>>>> break....
>>>> i have done a special testing ,i can tell you that if you will write the
>>>> memory address directly --- it will break.
>>>> but if you write the memory address indirectly ---- it will not break !!!
>>>>
>>> What do you mean by "write the memory address indirectly"?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Jason
>>>
>>>
---------------------------
Use http://oss.sgi.com/ecartis to modify your settings or to unsubscribe.
|