From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19849 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2012 02:57:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 19840 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jul 2012 02:57:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:57:30 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1Suak5-0002wc-I1 from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:57:29 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.96.206]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:57:29 -0700 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-02.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.96.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 19:57:28 -0700 From: Yao Qi To: CC: Pedro Alves Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] allow to suppress more mi notification Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 02:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1705340.40y1UybpUm@qiyao.dyndns.org> User-Agent: KMail/4.8.3 (Linux/3.3.7-1.fc16.i686; KDE/4.8.3; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <5011628A.3000707@redhat.com> References: <1343146252-22558-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1343146252-22558-3-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <5011628A.3000707@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-07/txt/msg00658.txt.bz2 On Thursday, July 26, 2012 04:30:18 PM Pedro Alves wrote: > > -extern int mi_suppress_breakpoint_notifications; > > + > > +enum MI_SUPRESS_NOTIFICATION { MI_SUPPRESS_BREAKPOINT }; > > +extern int mi_suppress_notification[]; > > > >=20=20 >=20 > Quite frankly, I don't see how putting these in an array is better than > a separate global for each. The memory used is the same, and with separa= te > globals, it's a little easier to debug from a top gdb (just print > mi_suppress_ to see the list of possibilities, etc.) Are you planni= ng > on doing something over the whole array, that is abstracted from the > semantics of each element of the array? The intention of this change is to avoid introducing more global variables = to=20 suppress different types of notification. I plan to add more notifications= =20 here (for register change, memory change, trace experiment change, etc), an= d=20 we need more suppress flags for them. Array makes sense here. AFAICS, I don't do something over the whole array. --=20 Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)