Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [patch 02/11] x86 architecture implementation of Hardware Breakpoint interfaces | | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | | Date | Sat, 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.
|  |