From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27151 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2013 16:35:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 27095 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jan 2013 16:34:59 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jan 2013 16:34:52 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r01GYlRO010063 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 1 Jan 2013 11:34:47 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-24.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.24]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r01GYgNr016326 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 1 Jan 2013 11:34:45 -0500 Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 16:35:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Metzger, Markus T" Cc: "palves@redhat.com" , "tromey@redhat.com" , "kettenis@gnu.org" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "markus.t.metzger@gmail.com" Subject: Re: [patch v6 00/12] branch tracing support for Atom Message-ID: <20130101163441.GA17579@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <1355760101-26237-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <20121218091953.GF8054@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121218135437.GA16636@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20121222130812.GA6195@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121222130812.GA6195@host2.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2013-01/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On Sat, 22 Dec 2012 14:08:12 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:59:37 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > > If I just followed the "target record" command, I would lose the selective > > enabling as well as the automatic enabling > > Pushing of the new target could be hooked to to_post_startup_inferior and > to_post_attach, I hope that's enough. When thinking about it the btrace target should stay pushed after "record btrace auto". And contrary to the current record.c practice it would no longer unpush itself during to_mourn_inferior, to_kill etc. (The same wouhld apply to a new feature "record auto" as it is the same issue. Just I do not want to get you into a too much work of improving record.c, I can take some parts of record.c if you ask for.) Also the keeping up to date of observer_attach_new_thread and observer_detach_new_thread could be simplified by creating a new to_target method would would be called together with observer_notify_new_thread. Then one can forget about to_post_startup_inferior/to_post_attach, that was a wrong advice. Thanks, Jan