From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-17987-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 11405 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2002 23:33:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 11394 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2002 23:33:41 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2002 23:33:41 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA09080;
	Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:27:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3D6574D1.6A745CB2@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:34:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
CC: Jim Ingham <jingham@apple.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] breakpoints and function prologues...
References: <157B023C-B09E-11D6-BDB5-00039379E320@apple.com> <3D5C4FCB.4070005@ges.redhat.com> <3D6566C1.DBE3FFD1@redhat.com> <3D656BBA.4090803@ges.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00737.txt.bz2

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> > Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> >
> >> > Most users I have talked to think that setting a break on the "{" at the beginning of a function means the same thing as setting a breakpoint on the function.  But that is not the case.   "break funcName" is AFTER the prologue, "break file:<line containing "{"> is the true function beginning.
> >
> >>
> >> Don't forget that ``break func'' is is going to change.  It's going to
> >> go back to the start of the function!
> >
> >
> > ???
> > Since when?
> 
> When an architecture enables CFI.  CFI removes any technical reason for
> skipping the prologue (what break foo does'') -- CFI allows you to find
> the value of registers and variables at any point in the code.
> 
> Of course,we could always leave ``break foo''.

You mean leave SKIP_PROLOGUE on ``break foo'', right?
Frankly, I see no reason to change it.