From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8577 invoked by alias); 11 Oct 2006 14:46:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 8564 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Oct 2006 14:46:42 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fra-del-03.spheriq.net (HELO fra-del-03.spheriq.net) (195.46.51.99) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:46:36 +0000 Received: from fra-out-02.spheriq.net (fra-out-02.spheriq.net [195.46.51.130]) by fra-del-03.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9BEkXfO024390 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:46:33 GMT Received: from fra-cus-02.spheriq.net (fra-cus-02.spheriq.net [195.46.51.38]) by fra-out-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9BEk64O013714 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:46:06 GMT Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by fra-cus-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id k9BEk4uX007027 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:46:06 GMT Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 205EBDA9D for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:45:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail1.bri.st.com (mail1.bri.st.com [164.129.8.218]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id CD9EF473C5 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:45:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [164.129.15.13] (bri1043.bri.st.com [164.129.15.13]) by mail1.bri.st.com (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id CIC24834 (AUTH stubbsa); Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:45:26 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <452D0385.6010103@st.com> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:46:00 -0000 From: Andrew STUBBS User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: GDB Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't give spurious warnings when using thread specific breakpoints References: <452CF534.4060209@st.com> <20061011135545.GA26060@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20061011135545.GA26060@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > (gdb) b main if 1 > Breakpoint 1 at 0x439ee0 > (gdb) b main if 2 > Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x439ee0. > Breakpoint 2 at 0x439ee0 > > If that's right, why is similar for threads wrong? That's just a > different condition. And the wording is such that it's perfectly > correct. Maybe that is wrong too, but, as you say, it isn't lying. I would argue that a breakpoint in another thread is not in the same location (unlike a condition). The similarity of the PC might be considered an accident of the implementation, perhaps. It's also easy to tell that the thread is different, while comparing conditions makes no sense (although checking for the presence of conditions might). In any case, it is an irritant, a customer has complained, and the added information isn't a bad thing. Andrew Stubbs