From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3088 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2002 17:34:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3081 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2002 17:34:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 2002 17:34:00 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382D63C8D; Fri, 16 Aug 2002 13:33:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D5D3787.30005@ges.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 10:34:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020810 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/ob] not_a_breakpoint -> not_a_sw_breakpoint References: <3D5D1C3E.8070203@ges.redhat.com> <20020816155016.GA27242@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00427.txt.bz2 > Great. I'm going to have to think about this a little more though; if > you look in infrun.c you'll see that this parameter sometimes comes > from catchpoints, which is unfortunate since we have nowhere that > indicates whether a catchpoint is affected by DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK or > not. See my e-mail to Kevin. it decides if DECR_PC_AFTER_[SOFTWARE_]BREAK[POINT_TRAP] should be applied. > (For i386/Linux, when I'm done with it, I believe that throw and catch > catchpoints WILL be affected by decr_pc_after_break.... and that > fork/exec/vfork catchpoints WON'T be. I had to hack around this in my > work tree.) Are throw/catch events implemented using software breakpoints that are entered into the breakpoint table? One of the characteristics of the software single step breakpoints is that they are not entered into the breakpoint table. This is why Joel needs to hide them from core GDB :-) I think fork/exec events can be treated separatly. enjoy, Andrew