Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole.

Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-03-06T12:24:56Z

On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:00:21PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Emi SUZUKI <emi-suzuki@tjsys.co.jp> writes:
>
> > + /* Assume that the atomic sequence ends with a stwcx instruction
> > + followed by a conditional branch instruction. */
> > + if ((insn & STWCX_MASK) != STWCX_INSTRUCTION)
> > + error (_("Tried to step over an atomic sequence of instructions but could not find the end of the sequence."));
>
> I don't think error should be called here. It would probably be better to
> just continue with the normal single-step here.

Maybe a (once-only) warning? It would be nice to let the user know
we're confused.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery