Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 12/23] Misc switch_back_to_stepped_thread cleanups
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 12:50:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1428410990-28560-13-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1428410990-28560-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com>

Several misc cleanups that prepare the tail end of this function, the
part that actually re-resumes the stepped thread.

The most non-obvious would be the currently_stepping change, I guess.
That's because it isn't ever correct to pass step=1 to target_resume
on software single-step targets, and currently_stepping works at a
conceptual higher level, it returns step=true even on software step
targets.  It doesn't really matter on hardware step targets, as the
breakpoint will be hit immediately, but it's just wrong on software
step targets.  I tested it against my x86 software single-step branch,
and it indeed fixes failed assertions (that catch spurious
PTRACE_SINGLESTEP requests) there.

gdb/ChangeLog:
2015-04-07  Pedro Alves  <palves@redhat.com>

	* infrun.c (switch_back_to_stepped_thread): Use ecs->ptid instead
	pf inferior_ptid.  If the stepped thread vanished, return 0
	instead of resuming here.  Use reset_ecs.  Print the prev_pc and
	the current stop_pc in log message.  Clear trap_expected if the
	thread advanced.  Don't pass currently_stepping to
	do_target_resume.
---
 gdb/infrun.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c
index 3e64c99..87bbe03 100644
--- a/gdb/infrun.c
+++ b/gdb/infrun.c
@@ -5722,7 +5722,7 @@ switch_back_to_stepped_thread (struct execution_control_state *ecs)
         {
 	  /* Ignore threads of processes we're not resuming.  */
 	  if (!sched_multi
-	      && ptid_get_pid (tp->ptid) != ptid_get_pid (inferior_ptid))
+	      && ptid_get_pid (tp->ptid) != ptid_get_pid (ecs->ptid))
 	    continue;
 
 	  /* When stepping over a breakpoint, we lock all threads
@@ -5786,19 +5786,17 @@ switch_back_to_stepped_thread (struct execution_control_state *ecs)
 				    "stepped thread, it has vanished\n");
 
 	      delete_thread (tp->ptid);
-	      keep_going (ecs);
-	      return 1;
+	      return 0;
 	    }
 
 	  if (debug_infrun)
 	    fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog,
 				"infrun: switching back to stepped thread\n");
 
-	  ecs->event_thread = tp;
-	  ecs->ptid = tp->ptid;
-	  context_switch (ecs->ptid);
+	  reset_ecs (ecs, tp);
+	  switch_to_thread (tp->ptid);
 
-	  stop_pc = regcache_read_pc (get_thread_regcache (ecs->ptid));
+	  stop_pc = regcache_read_pc (get_thread_regcache (tp->ptid));
 	  frame = get_current_frame ();
 	  gdbarch = get_frame_arch (frame);
 
@@ -5822,23 +5820,28 @@ switch_back_to_stepped_thread (struct execution_control_state *ecs)
 
 	      if (debug_infrun)
 		fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog,
-				    "infrun: expected thread advanced also\n");
+				    "infrun: expected thread advanced also "
+				    "(%s -> %s)\n",
+				    paddress (target_gdbarch (), tp->prev_pc),
+				    paddress (target_gdbarch (), stop_pc));
 
 	      /* Clear the info of the previous step-over, as it's no
-		 longer valid.  It's what keep_going would do too, if
-		 we called it.  Must do this before trying to insert
-		 the sss breakpoint, otherwise if we were previously
-		 trying to step over this exact address in another
-		 thread, the breakpoint ends up not installed.  */
+		 longer valid (if the thread was trying to step over a
+		 breakpoint, it has already succeeded).  It's what
+		 keep_going would do too, if we called it.  Do this
+		 before trying to insert the sss breakpoint, otherwise
+		 if we were previously trying to step over this exact
+		 address in another thread, the breakpoint is
+		 skipped.  */
 	      clear_step_over_info ();
+	      tp->control.trap_expected = 0;
 
 	      insert_single_step_breakpoint (get_frame_arch (frame),
 					     get_frame_address_space (frame),
 					     stop_pc);
 
 	      resume_ptid = user_visible_resume_ptid (tp->control.stepping_command);
-	      do_target_resume (resume_ptid,
-				currently_stepping (tp), GDB_SIGNAL_0);
+	      do_target_resume (resume_ptid, 0, GDB_SIGNAL_0);
 	      prepare_to_wait (ecs);
 	    }
 	  else
-- 
1.9.3


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-04-07 12:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-07 12:49 [PATCH v2 00/23] All-stop on top of non-stop Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 20/23] PPC64: symbol-file + exec-file results in broken displaced stepping Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 21/23] PPC64: Fix gdb.arch/ppc64-atomic-inst.exp with " Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 16/23] Fix signal-while-stepping-over-bp-other-thread.exp on targets always in non-stop Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 09/23] Make gdb.threads/step-over-trips-on-watchpoint.exp effective on !x86 Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 23/23] native Linux: enable always non-stop by default Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 11/23] Use keep_going in proceed and start_step_over too Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 04/23] Change adjust_pc_after_break's prototype Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 10/23] PPC64: Fix step-over-trips-on-watchpoint.exp with displaced stepping on Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 02/23] Fix and test "checkpoint" in non-stop mode Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 05/23] remote.c/all-stop: Implement TARGET_WAITKIND_NO_RESUMED and TARGET_WNOHANG Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 15/23] Implement all-stop on top of a target running non-stop mode Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 13:36   ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-04-08  9:34   ` Yao Qi
2015-04-08  9:53     ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-08 11:08       ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-08 19:35         ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-08 19:41           ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 03/23] PR13858 - Can't do displaced stepping with no symbols Pedro Alves
2015-04-09 12:46   ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 19/23] Disable displaced stepping if trying it fails Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 22/23] S/390: displaced stepping and PC-relative RIL-b/RIL-c instructions Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:50 ` [PATCH v2 01/23] Fix gdb.base/sigstep.exp with displaced stepping on software single-step targets Pedro Alves
2015-04-10  9:56   ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:55 ` [PATCH v2 17/23] Fix interrupt-noterm.exp on targets always in non-stop Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:57 ` [PATCH v2 08/23] Test step-over-{lands-on-breakpoint|trips-on-watchpoint}.exp with displaced stepping Pedro Alves
2015-04-10 14:54   ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:59 ` [PATCH v2 07/23] Embed the pending step-over chain in thread_info objects Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:59 ` [PATCH v2 13/23] Factor out code to re-resume stepped thread Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 12:59 ` [PATCH v2 14/23] Teach non-stop to do in-line step-overs (stop all, step, restart) Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 13:30 ` [PATCH v2 06/23] Make thread_still_needs_step_over consider stepping_over_watchpoint too Pedro Alves
2015-04-08  9:28   ` Yao Qi
2015-04-13 10:47     ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-07 13:30 ` [PATCH v2 18/23] Fix step-over-{trips-on-watchpoint|lands-on-breakpoint}.exp race Pedro Alves
2015-04-08  9:45 ` [PATCH v2 00/23] All-stop on top of non-stop Yao Qi
2015-04-08 10:17   ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-08 10:30     ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-10  8:41     ` Yao Qi
2015-04-10  8:50       ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-10  8:22 ` Yao Qi
2015-04-10  8:34   ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-10  9:26     ` Yao Qi
2015-04-13 15:28       ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-13 16:16         ` Yao Qi
2015-04-13 16:23           ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-13 16:23           ` Pedro Alves

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1428410990-28560-13-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com \
    --to=palves@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox