Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] [ia64] Fix (#2) shadowing of breakpoints [testcase 	fixup]
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:18:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090907181750.GF30677@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090907041040.GA25651@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>

> gdb/
> 2009-09-05  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> 
> 	Fix ia64 shadowing of breakpoints in multiple slots of a single bundle.
> 	* ia64-tdep.c (ia64_memory_insert_breakpoint): New call
> 	of make_show_memory_breakpoints_cleanup with parameter 0.  Move the
> 	reading of SHADOW_CONTENTS to this memory state point of code.

Patch is approved. I had a hard time understanding what was going on
(relatively speaking), but eventually got it. Perhaps a little comment
updated as suggested below might help; your call.

> gdb/testsuite/
> 2009-09-07  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> 
> 	* gdb.base/breakpoint-shadow.exp (Second breakpoint placed): Initialize
> 	$bpt2address.
> 	(Second breakpoint address is valid on ia64)
> 	(ia64 breakpoint in the Second breakpoint bundle): New.

Approved as well :).

>    /* Disable the automatic memory restoration from breakpoints while
>       we read our instruction bundle.  Otherwise, the general restoration
>       mechanism kicks in and we would possibly remove parts of the adjacent
>       placed breakpoints.  It is due to our SHADOW_CONTENTS overlapping the real

This is where I think it would be worth explaining that we are *re*
reading the bundle except that, this time, we are reading it in order
to compute the new bundle inside which we'll be inserting the
breakpoint. Therefore, we have to disable the automatic memory
restoration, bla bla bla.

> +if [istarget "ia64-*-*"] then {
> +    # Unoptimized code should not use the 3rd slot for the first instruction of
> +    # a source line.

This is important for our test, because we want both breakpoints
(break-first and break-second) to be in the same bundle.

-- 
Joel


  reply	other threads:[~2009-09-07 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-05 18:59 [patch] [ia64] Fix (#2) shadowing of breakpoints Jan Kratochvil
2009-09-07  4:11 ` [patch] [ia64] Fix (#2) shadowing of breakpoints [testcase fixup] Jan Kratochvil
2009-09-07 18:18   ` Joel Brobecker [this message]
2009-09-08 17:44     ` Jan Kratochvil

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090907181750.GF30677@adacore.com \
    --to=brobecker@adacore.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox