RE: [RFA] Clarify infrun variable naming.

["Pierre Muller" <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr>]

> +   If we hit a breakpoint or watchpoint, and then continue,
> +   we need to single step the current thread with breakpoints
> +   disabled, so that to avoid hitting the same breakpoint or
> +   watchpoint again.  And we should step just a single
> +   thread and keep other threads stopped, so that
> +   other threads don't miss breakpoints while they are removed.
> +
> +   So, this variable simultaneously means that we need to single
> +   step current thread, keep other threads stopped, and that
> +   breakpoints should be removed while we step.
  But this is the reason of the failure to catch watchpoints
that happen at the point where we are just stepping over a breakpoint, 
because we step with the watchpoints disabled.
  Why don't we enable all break- and watchpoints but the
ones that do have the same PC we are currently?

  Enabling at least all watchpoints would fix gdb/38 failure as
seen in gdb.base/watchpoint.exp where it is noted as a KFAIL.

  I tried to check this by adding a insert_watchpoint function
a few days ago, but if you are working on it anyhow,
and probably master this much better than I do, it would be
great to solve that issue at the same time.


Pierre