Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
To: muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, djbarrow@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC 2] Remove hardware break and watchpoints at program exit.
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 04:38:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2561-Fri11Jan2002143543+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20020111125745.0135ea48@ics.u-strasbg.fr> (message from Pierre Muller on Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:00:44 +0100)

> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:00:44 +0100
> From: Pierre Muller <muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr>
> 
>    In breakpoint_init_inferior
> I added code that conditionally removes hardware watch and breakpoint 
> if the context is inf_exited, i.e. at exit of the debugged program.

Thanks.  I like this approach much better, especially because I never
understood why does GDB do certain cleanups when the debuggee exits,
but doesn't do other, similar cleanups.

> I still kept the call to a generic hardware removal function
> and testing the i386 case, I could see that even though the dr_mirror
> array is zeored out, the dr_control_mirror and
> dr_status_mirror still aren't set to zero.
> For dr_control_register, this is due to an error in the I386_DR_DISABLE
> because that macro only resets the active bit, but not the size and type bits 
> associated to that debug register.

Why is this a problem?  Once the active bit is off, the corresponding
debug register is inactive, and its value is not important.

>          * breakpoint.c (REMOVE_HARDWARE_BREAKPOINT_AT_EXIT): 
>          Define to 0 if not defined.
>          (REMOVE_HARDWARE_WATCHPOINT_AT_EXIT): 
>          Define to 0 if not defined.

Why do we need these macros at all?  Why not remove the breakpoints
and watchpoints unconditionally?  Does anyone see any problem?

> --- go32-nat.c	2001/12/06 08:15:37	1.26
> +++ go32-nat.c	2002/01/11 11:34:08
> @@ -670,7 +670,7 @@ go32_mourn_inferior (void)
>       be nice if GDB itself would take care to remove all breakpoints
>       at all times, but it doesn't, probably under an assumption that
>       the OS cleans up when the debuggee exits.  */
> -  i386_cleanup_dregs ();
> +  // i386_cleanup_dregs ();

Please don't make such changes.  If you want to remove some code, just
remove it, don't comment it away: it looks ad-hoc and not clean.


  reply	other threads:[~2002-01-11 12:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-11  4:01 Pierre Muller
2002-01-11  4:38 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2002-01-11  4:57   ` Pierre Muller
2002-01-11  5:58     ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-11  5:39   ` Pierre Muller
2002-01-11  6:06     ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-11  8:15       ` Pierre Muller
2002-01-11  9:20       ` [RFA/RFC 3] " Pierre Muller
2002-01-12  5:20         ` Mark Kettenis
2002-01-12 13:16           ` muller
2002-01-13  0:31           ` Eli Zaretskii

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=2561-Fri11Jan2002143543+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il \
    --to=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
    --cc=djbarrow@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr \
    /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