|
From: Freddie C. <fre...@op...> - 2017-03-26 14:11:54
|
Hi Duane! On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 07:33 -0700, Duane Ellis wrote: > Bottom line: I believe the current gdb server solution is not well > suited for some complex bare metal things - and that is what this > thread is about. > > What I proposed a while back was this: > [...] Wouldn't that actually result in OpenOCD's functionality being merged into GDB? It's an interesting idea, but I think it would be the hardest one to actually implement, given all the issues with JTAG interfaces and their configurations... Unless I misread your proposal? Maybe you suggest that GDB should not interact with OpenOCD as with a "GDB server" but communicate using some special interface designed just for that situation? Regards, FCh |