Hi Evan, If qThreadExtraInfo is not implemented, qP will be used. But since qThreadExtraInfo has now been implemented, qP should not be needed any more. GDB added qThreadExtraInfo more than 10 years ago. All GDB releases since 5.0 will not send out qP packet if the stub supports qThreadExtraInfo. So I think it's safe for OpenOCD to remove qP support and only keep qThreadExtraInfo. This will make code clean and reduce maintenance effort.
Regards, Jie On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Evan Hunter <e...@ozhiker.com> wrote: > Backward compatibility is the reason - > When I was testing with GDB+eclipse I found that OpenOCD received "qP" > packets sometimes, and I think I implemented it first, before reading that > same quotation you mentioned. Then when I implemented qThreadExtraInfo, I > figured it was nicer to keep "qP" compatibility too. > > Regards, > > Evan > > > > > Quoting Jie Zhang <jzhang...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi Evan, >> >> GDB manual says about "qP": >> >> Don't use this packet; use the `qThreadExtraInfo' query instead (see >> below). >> >> Since "qThreadExtraInfo" is already supported in rtos.c, why "qP" is >> still needed? >> >> Regards, >> Jie >> _______________________________________________ >> Openocd-development mailing list >> Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development >> > > > > _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
