From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9815 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2007 18:44:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 9804 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2007 18:44:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate4.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate4.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.153) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:44:27 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate4.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l8AIiMxL174316 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:44:22 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l8AIiMCK2261228 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:44:22 +0200 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l8AIiMis031268 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:44:22 +0200 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id l8AIiMG3031265; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:44:22 +0200 Message-Id: <200709101844.l8AIiMG3031265@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:44:22 +0200 Subject: Re: [patch 0/1] Threaded Watchpoints To: drow@false.org (Daniel Jacobowitz) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:44:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20070910182922.GA18690@caradoc.them.org> from "Daniel Jacobowitz" at Sep 10, 2007 02:29:22 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2007-09/txt/msg00143.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 08:22:56PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > Was the change to remove use of HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINTS deliberate? > > It used to be that you had to set one of the three flags in order to > > activate the watchpoint logic at all, but your new code will always > > call STOPPED_BY_WATCHPOINT. > > Yes - do you think I shouldn't? Easy enough to put it back. I guess your new way makes more sense. This means we can remove HAVE_CONTINUABLE_WATCHPOINTS completely, though. (As a related point, I think it would be good to fix the oddity that nonsteppable watchpoints are reported as a gdbarch property while steppable watchpoints are reported as a target property ...) > > This assumes that the new thread's ptid will always be passed to the > > resume. Is this necessarily the case? I would expect ptid to be -1 > > in most cases ... > > It is necessarily the case. This function is never called through > target_resume, only through linux_nat_resume. This was one of the big > cleanups that made my patch possible. Hmm, I see. This assumes that after every new-thread event, the new thread is selected as inferior_ptid, though. This unfortunately interferes with a patch I'm working on right now: when a new thread event (or shared library event) occurs while we're currently single- stepping another thread, things don't work very well right now. I was proposing to fix this by always selecting the thread being stepped as current thread again after processing the event ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com