From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31812 invoked by alias); 31 Jan 2011 15:12:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 31803 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Jan 2011 15:12:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:12:40 +0000 Received: (qmail 31501 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2011 15:12:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO caradoc.them.org) (dan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 31 Jan 2011 15:12:38 -0000 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:39:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Maxim Grigoriev , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Marc Gauthier , Pedro Alves , Stan Shebs Subject: Re: Faster stepping amidst breakpoints Message-ID: <20110131151229.GA2915@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Maxim Grigoriev , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Marc Gauthier , Pedro Alves , Stan Shebs References: <4D3A114D.7010301@tensilica.com> <20110123001433.GA6352@caradoc.them.org> <20110131044951.GG2384@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110131044951.GG2384@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2011-01/txt/msg00585.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 08:49:51AM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Consider "set breakpoint always-inserted". > > I've been wondering lately if we should flip the default. > > I like the idea of changing the default. > > Do you know what the risks would be? I looked at the code, and > there isn't something obvious/delicate, it seems. Perhaps we might > find ourselves forgetting to re-insert breakpoints, or inserting > them twice? I think you guys have more experience than we do? As far as I can remember (you know how much GDB development I do nowadays), the only risks were if GDB crashed and left the application with breakpoints inserted. Of course, I'm in favor of GDB not crashing. Pedro, Stan, any thoughts? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery