lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch 02/11] x86 architecture implementation of Hardware Breakpoint interfaces
FromBenjamin Herrenschmidt <>
DateSat, 14 Mar 2009 14:41:15 +1100
On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 16:30 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> Suppose we never allow callers to register more breakpoints than will
> fit in the CPU's registers. Do we then use a simple first-come
> first-served algorithm, with no prioritization? If we do prioritize
> some breakpoint registrations more highly than others, how do we
> inform
> callers that their breakpoint has been kicked out by one of higher
> priority? And how do we let them know when the higher-priority
> breakpoint has been unregistered, so they can try again?

Do we really need such a mess ? Honestly ... We've been living fine
before without any of that.

Ben.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-14 04:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2010