From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4973 invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2011 15:17:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 4957 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Feb 2011 15:17:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (83.163.83.176) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:17:03 +0000 Received: from glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p1DFGkeo021251; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 16:16:46 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p1DFGidE017378; Sun, 13 Feb 2011 16:16:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 15:17:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201102131516.p1DFGidE017378@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: brobecker@adacore.com CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20110201032338.GI2384@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Tue, 1 Feb 2011 07:23:38 +0400) Subject: Re: Faster stepping amidst breakpoints References: <4D3A114D.7010301@tensilica.com> <20110123001433.GA6352@caradoc.them.org> <20110131044951.GG2384@adacore.com> <20110131151229.GA2915@caradoc.them.org> <20110201032338.GI2384@adacore.com> 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: 2011-02/txt/msg00247.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 07:23:38 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > > > 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. > > I see this as an acceptable outcome of a debugger crash. I am guessing > that in most cases, people debug their program, and then want it killed, > so leaving the inferior behind with breakpoints inserted won't matter > much (or, not as much as having their session brutally interrupted by > the crash itself). For the small number of those for whom it matters, > they can change the switch back... You're probably right for the case where people start the program from GDB, but I guess that when people attach to an already running process they typically don't want to kill it when they're done with debugging. That said, it is probably a bad idea to have different behaviour for "run" and "attach" in this case. Let's throw the switch after the 7.3 release and see if people even notice.