From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: don't set the pspace on ordinary breakpoints
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:30:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201111091830.31856.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3k47agy8e.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On Tuesday 08 November 2011 20:23:13, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
>
> Tom> I think I will change linespec to ignore program spaces in this state.
>
> The appended has two parts: the linespec.c change, relative to the big
> patch I posted, and the breakpoint.c change I think is needed too. Only
> the latter makes sense in the context of this thread.
>
> I *think* the should_be_inserted change is all that was really needed,
> after re-reading all the messages in this thread. Let me know what you
> think.
I think so, but it's hard to tell, given that the dependency
on the linespec.c changes.
E.g.,
> @@ -1327,6 +1329,12 @@ decode_indirect (struct linespec_state *self, char **argptr)
> CORE_ADDR pc;
> char *initial = *argptr;
>
> + if (current_program_space->executing_startup)
> + /* The error message doesn't really matter, because this case
> + should only hit during breakpoint reset. */
> + throw_error (NOT_FOUND_ERROR, _("cannot evaluate expressions while "
> + "program space is in startup"));
Why is is okay to look at current_program_space here, if you're
iterating over pspaces elsewhere?
Any chance we can have a standalone patch for just the
startup-disabled changes? We'd need something like my previous
suggestion in bkpt_re_set (even if we'd remain buggy WRT
multi-process).
--
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-09 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-27 15:32 Tom Tromey
2011-10-31 1:03 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-31 12:07 ` Yao Qi
2011-11-02 18:55 ` Pedro Alves
2011-11-02 19:47 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-02 20:21 ` Pedro Alves
2011-11-03 14:01 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-03 16:02 ` Pedro Alves
2011-11-03 19:33 ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-11-08 19:32 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-08 20:23 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-09 18:24 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-09 18:30 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-11-09 18:41 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-10 16:53 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-10 17:49 ` Pedro Alves
2011-11-10 17:57 ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-11-10 19:27 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-10 20:23 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-11 12:56 ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-11-11 14:47 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-14 21:12 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-16 18:37 ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-11-16 21:24 ` Tom Tromey
2011-11-18 18:31 ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-01-02 18:18 ` [7.4 regression] Stand-alone Cell debugging broken (Re: RFC: don't set the pspace on ordinary breakpoints) Ulrich Weigand
2012-01-03 3:15 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-01-03 20:29 ` Tom Tromey
2012-01-04 12:36 ` Ulrich Weigand
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=201111091830.31856.pedro@codesourcery.com \
--to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=uweigand@de.ibm.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