From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22843 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2004 22:34:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22836 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2004 22:34:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Jan 2004 22:34:28 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1AjnPA-0004oB-Jf for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:34:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 22:34:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: Centralize DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK handling from infrun Message-ID: <20040122223428.GA18400@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040117222007.GA23563@nevyn.them.org> <400FD985.9040506@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <400FD985.9040506@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00618.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 09:09:09AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Is it possible to determine the need for the decrement based solely on > the knowledge of how the thread was resumed (step, run, ...)? In the > remote case there isn't convenient access to the list of currently > inserted breakpoints. Not sure what remote case you're referring to, can you give me an example? I'm not sure what the consequences of removing the software_breakpoint_inserted_here_p test would be, but it'll be easier to find out after I've reorganized. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer