Re: [patch/rfc] Use frame_type for sigtramp test in infrun.c

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 790 bytes --]

> Joel, from memory you had a change to:
> 
>   if (((stop_pc == ecs->stop_func_start	/* Quick test */
> 	|| in_prologue (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_start))
>        && !IN_SOLIB_RETURN_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name))
>       || IN_SOLIB_CALL_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name)
>       || ecs->stop_func_name == 0)
>     {
>       /* It's a subroutine call.  */
>       handle_step_into_function (ecs);
>       return;
>     }
> 
> pending?  If we do pull the sigtramp code I think it would be prudent to 
> first have that committed - Joel's change greatly clarifies the logic.

Just to make sure we're talking about the same patch, attached is the
patch I was working on (may need to be updated to the current sources).
Is that what you were refering to?

Thanks,
-- 
Joel

[-- Attachment #2: infrun.c.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2752 bytes --]

Index: infrun.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/infrun.c,v
retrieving revision 1.140
diff -u -p -r1.140 infrun.c
--- infrun.c	15 Mar 2004 17:12:50 -0000	1.140
+++ infrun.c	3 Apr 2004 00:06:46 -0000
@@ -2516,6 +2516,18 @@ process_event_stop_test:
       return;
     }
 
+  if (step_over_calls == STEP_OVER_UNDEBUGGABLE
+      && ecs->stop_func_name == NULL)
+    {
+      /* There is no symbol, not even a minimal symbol, corresponding
+         to the address where we just stopped.  So we just stepped
+         inside undebuggable code.  Since we want to step over this
+         kind of code, we keep going until the inferior returns from
+         the current function.  */
+      handle_step_into_function (ecs);
+      return;
+    }
+
   /* We can't update step_sp every time through the loop, because
      reading the stack pointer would slow down stepping too much.
      But we can update it every time we leave the step range.  */
@@ -2605,15 +2617,35 @@ process_event_stop_test:
       return;
     }
 
-  if (((stop_pc == ecs->stop_func_start	/* Quick test */
-	|| in_prologue (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_start))
-       && !IN_SOLIB_RETURN_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name))
-      || IN_SOLIB_CALL_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name)
-      || ecs->stop_func_name == 0)
+  if (legacy_frame_p (current_gdbarch))
     {
-      /* It's a subroutine call.  */
-      handle_step_into_function (ecs);
-      return;
+      /* FIXME: brobecker/2004-03-04: The current architecture is still
+         using the legacy frame code, so we prefer not to rely on frame IDs
+         to check whether we just stepped into a function or not.  Some
+         experiments conducted on sparc-solaris before it was converted
+         to the new frame code showed that it could introduce some
+         severe problems.  Once all targets have transitioned to the new
+         frame code, this block can be deleted.  */
+      if (((stop_pc == ecs->stop_func_start	/* Quick test */
+            || in_prologue (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_start))
+           && !IN_SOLIB_RETURN_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name))
+          || IN_SOLIB_CALL_TRAMPOLINE (stop_pc, ecs->stop_func_name)
+          || ecs->stop_func_name == 0)
+        {
+          /* It's a subroutine call.  */
+          handle_step_into_function (ecs);
+          return;
+        }
+    }
+  else
+    {
+      if (frame_id_eq (get_frame_id (get_prev_frame (get_current_frame ())),
+                       step_frame_id))
+        {
+          /* It's a subroutine call.  */
+          handle_step_into_function (ecs);
+          return;
+        }
     }
 
   /* We've wandered out of the step range.  */