Re: proposed PATCH: make watchpoints work correctly

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 10:50:59AM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:
> 
>  >> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 11:17:54 -0400 From: Paul Koning
>  >> <pkoning@equallogic.com>
>  >> 
>  Eli> Certainly, I understand that.  I just was surprised that your
>  Eli> description of the problem was so different from my recollection
>  Eli> of how watchpoints work.
>  >> I just ran a small test case on the x86 Linux native build of gdb
>  >> 5.3, and the problem (step works as if it were stepi, falsely
>  >> reported as a watchpoint hit) occurs there as well -- just as
>  >> expected.
> 
>  Eli> Thanks, I now see the problem.
> 
>  Eli> I think your solution is correct, but I'd like to minimize the
>  Eli> number of calls to target_stopped_data_address (they might be
>  Eli> expensive).  Since the code already does call that function that
>  Eli> elsewhere, could we just reuse the result of that call, or
>  Eli> rearrange your patch so that a single call would do?
> 
>  Eli> Otherwise, I think your change should go in.  Thanks.
> 
> Thanks.  I'll look at the rearranging you suggested.

Sorting through my TODO list I found your test code for this issue; did
you ever finish the patch?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer