From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Improve the "thread_step_needed" logic
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 11:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010616115802.A29172@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3B2AB2D4.F8C95E0D@cygnus.com>
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:13:56PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > <sigh>
> >
> > While you're fixing this, could you please address my issue from last
> > week with this code? Checking "step" at this point in resume() is not
> > correct, since it will have been cleared if SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP_P ().
> >
> > > --- 879,913 ----
> > > if (should_resume)
> > > {
> > > ptid_t resume_ptid;
> > > +
> > > + resume_ptid = RESUME_ALL; /* Default */
> > >
> > > ! if ((step || singlestep_breakpoints_inserted_p) &&
> > > ! !breakpoints_inserted && breakpoint_here_p (read_pc ()))
> >
> > > +
> > > + #ifdef CANNOT_STEP_BREAKPOINT
> > > + /* Most targets can step a breakpoint instruction, thus executing it
> > > + normally. But if this one cannot, just continue and we will hit
> > > + it anyway. */
> > > + if (step && breakpoints_inserted && breakpoint_here_p (read_pc ()))
> > > + step = 0;
> > > + #endif
> >
> > Specifically, those bits.
>
> Oh, sorry, I missed this part of your msg.
> Well, this isn't related to SOFTWARE_SINGLESTEP_P,
> it's a separate issue. But if you'll notice, I believe this is also
> handled correctly, because my "thread_step_needed" test includes
> (NOT breakpoints_inserted), while this CANNOT_STEP_BREAKPOINT clause
> will only be taken if breakpoints_inserted is true. So they are
> mutually exclusive, if you will. I tested this on Alpha Linux, which
> does NOT use software single step, but DOES use CANNOT_STEP_BREAKPOINT,
> and it works.
My apologies. I need to read closer before replying :)
I'm assuming that singlestep_breakpoints_inserted_p is zero normally
upon entering resume - that only makes sense. In that case, your
change preserves the exact behavior I was asking for. I'm going to run
it through the testsuite on MIPS/Linux, which I've finally gotten into
(almost) functional shape, and let you know if something breaks - I
expect that it will not break, though.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Monta Vista Software Debian Security Team
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-16 11:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-15 16:35 Michael Snyder
2001-06-15 16:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-06-15 18:05 ` Michael Snyder
2001-06-15 18:13 ` Michael Snyder
2001-06-16 11:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2001-06-18 9:11 ` Michael Snyder
2001-06-18 10:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-06-25 17:26 ` Michael Snyder
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=20010616115802.A29172@nevyn.them.org \
--to=dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=msnyder@cygnus.com \
/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