From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26018 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2012 19:17:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 26006 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jan 2012 19:17:08 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,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, 24 Jan 2012 19:16:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q0OJGtG1021080 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:16:55 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0OJGrZc000550; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:16:54 -0500 Message-ID: <4F1F03A5.6040804@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:17:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [4/4] RFC: implement catch load and catch unload References: <4F19B998.2030308@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-01/txt/msg00839.txt.bz2 On 01/24/2012 05:07 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>> + ui_out_field_int (current_uiout, "spurious", 1); > > Pedro> Do we need "spurious"? We get the same info from neither > Pedro> "removed" nor "added" being present. I'm not super fond of using > Pedro> the word "spurious" because the stop had some reason, and in my > Pedro> mind, something spurious is something that should not have > Pedro> happened. But in this case, the stop means something, but we're > Pedro> not interpreting it. > > I removed it. I also removed it from the ui_out_text call. Thanks. > Pedro> Maybe for "catch ...", we shouldn't report a stop in the > Pedro> "spurious" case? > > We don't -- check_status_catch_solib will filter them out. Ah, missed that. Great. >>> + if (self->base.pspace != NULL && other->pspace != self->base.pspace) >>> + continue; > > Pedro> So a consequence of this is that "catch load" is only active for > Pedro> the inferior was current when the catchpoint was created, right? > Pedro> Was that the intention? If we already had itsets, we could make > Pedro> it trigger on all inferiors by default, and then use itsets to > Pedro> filter. > > I just made it work the way other catchpoints seem to work. They are > also pspace-specific. It seemed ok to do this, to me, on the theory > that one more spot to change for itsets won't be a big burden; while on > the other hand being different here doesn't seem beneficial. Okay, that's reasonable. -- Pedro Alves