Re: [RFA]: Watchpoints per thread patch

Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-09T01:04:32Z

On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 04:32:23PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Given our already overcommitted backlog: breakpoints on C++
> constructors, breakpoints on inline code, DW_OP_piece, i18n, multi-arch
> solib, ....; how realistic is it that we'll, in addition, manage to both
> refactor the linux code base (I know this will be slow as I've been
> working on it) and also add multi-threaded watchpoints, all in the 6.4
> time frame?
>
> Let concentrate on clearing existing backlog, and not add another
> promise to the list.

*sarcasm*

You're right. That's an excellent plan. Let's just drop the
multithreaded watchpoint patch, then, if it will never make it
to the front of the backlog.

*sarcasm off*

I don't think that "we have too many other plans" is a reason to accept
obviously broken code, which abuses the observer mechanism and would
make further cleanups of the breakpoint code and target stack more
difficult.

On top of that, we've already _started_ on i18n, DW_OP_piece, and
refactoring the GNU/Linux code base from that list. So I think it's
actually pretty likely that the refactoring will get done. Compare
to multiarching solib and breakpoints on inline functions, neither of
which has had any progress in some years.

Sorry, Jeff. If we want this feature for GDB 6.4, then we'll have to
get there the normal way. I think we can do it.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz