Re: Fixes for a couple of infrun bugs (thread hop, revert to step thread).

["Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>]

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Monday 16 August 2010 19:40:47, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Pedro Alves wrote:
> > 
> > > Replacing the "next" by a "continue" should work.  I've looked over the
> > > original description of the problem this is covering, and, that
> > > would still exercise the problem (which is gdb trying to step
> > > the other (main) thread with inferior_ptid still pointing at
> > > the thread that was being "next"ed, and in the process failing
> > > to remove breakpoints from memory because inferior_ptid pointed
> > > at an inferior thread.
> > 
> > But isn't the code your patch changes under an if that's only true
> > if another thread is currently being stepped or nexted?  If we just
> > do "continue" here, that's no longer the case, and the code wouldn't
> > be exercised at all ...
> 
> That's also exercised by the other test my original patch added,
> IIRC (gdb.thread/thread-execl.exp).  There were two bugs fixed by
> that patch.  The specific bug the threxit-hop-specific.exp test is
> covering is the "failing to remove breakpoints" one.

Ah, I see.  Well, in that case, I'd certainly be happy with changing
the next to continue ...

Thanks,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com