Re: [4/9] associate bpstat with location

[Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>]

On Saturday 08 September 2007 18:43:46 Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Saturday 08 September 2007 16:15:35 Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > > The reason why the assumption is valid is because the only way to have
> > > several bpstats refer to one breakpoint is when breakpoint has two
> > > locations, and both locations have the same address. That makes no sense --
> > > there's no per-location data that can make those locations different
> > > in behaviour, and so having two locations with same address would
> > > be a bug.
> > 
> > If this can happen only as a result of a bug, perhaps a gdb_assert is
> > in order.
> 
> Yes, except there's no convenient place where assert can be placed.
> To assert this assumption you have to actually walk though all bpstats
> and check for duplication locations, and that's too much work.
> 
> > > > >      case bp_access_watchpoint:
> > > > >        if (bs->old_val != NULL)     
> > > > >  	{
> > > > > -	  annotate_watchpoint (bs->breakpoint_at->number);
> > > > > +	  annotate_watchpoint (b->number);
> > > > 
> > > > Watchpoints also?  Did you make corresponding changes in the code that
> > > > sets watchpoints?
> > > 
> > > No. This patch is not supposed to have any change in behaviour whatsoever,
> > > it merely moves a data member.
> > 
> > Does that mean that the display of watchpoints for "info watch" will
> > be now different from "info break"?
> 
> *This* patch does not change input of "info break". In fact, it does not change
> any observable behaviour.
> 
> As for future patches, the basically have two output changes:
> 
> 	1. Printing of multiple locations, if any
> 	2. Printing of "(p)"
> 
> Neither of those output changes are applicable to watchpoints. (1) is not
> applicable because watchpoints can't have multiple locations, in the same
> way breakpoints do. (2) is not applicable because gdb will never try to
> set bp_shlib_disabled state for a watchpoint, neither in the current code, nor
> after my patches.

Eli,
are you happy with the explanations above?

- Volodya