From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32733 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2007 12:15:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 32716 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Apr 2007 12:15:35 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 13:15:31 +0100 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351454B267; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 07:15:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02EDB4B262; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 07:15:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HbyD2-00030R-H8; Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:15:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole. Message-ID: <20070412121528.GA11412@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1173997454.4772.27.camel@localhost> <20070410204010.GB2056@caradoc.them.org> <1176379764.4434.16.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1176379764.4434.16.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-04/txt/msg00161.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:09:24AM -0300, Luis Machado wrote: > Daniel, > > Thanks for your reply. The syntax problem was corrected. > > I've ran the gdb_mbuild.sh script and had no problems that are directly > related to my patch. I had a compilation problem with the spu-elf, but > that seems to be in cvs-HEAD as well. I also changed the return type of > the software single step method for spu-elf and the local return values > from the method ("return" to "return 1"), since they were still void. This version is basically OK. > 2007-04-12 Luis Machado > > * gdbarch.sh: Change the return type of software_single_step from > void to int and reformatted some comments to <= 80 columns. * gdbarch.sh (software_single_step): Change the return type from void to int and reformatted some comments to <= 80 columns. > * alpha-tdep.c (alpha_software_single_step): Change the return type > from void to int and always return 1. > * alpha-tdep.h: Change the return type of alpha_software_single_step > from void to int. > * arm-tdep.c (arm_software_single_step): Change the return type from > void to int and always return 1. * alpha-tdep.h (alpha_software_single_step): Likewise. * arm-tdep.c (arm_software_single_step): Likewise. ... et cetera. No need to repeat. > infrun.c (resume): Check the return value from SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP > and act accordingly. True means that the software_single_step > breakpoints where inserted; false means they where not. * infrun.c (resume): Check the return value from SOFTWARE_SINGLE_STEP and act accordingly. Note, part of this explanatory comment vanished because we don't put "why" in ChangeLogs. This is the sort of thing that one ought to know when working with the code. Therefore it should be a comment in the code. Please describe the return value in gdbarch.sh. Thanks! -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery