From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32133 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2012 13:55:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 32092 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Dec 2012 13:55:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:55:43 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1TgyP0-0000xd-LW from Yao_Qi@mentor.com ; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 05:55:42 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-03.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.39]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 7 Dec 2012 05:55:42 -0800 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.39) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 05:55:41 -0800 Message-ID: <50C1F553.8030502@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:55:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120911 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] Test tracepoints are installed or not References: <1354596282-32526-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1354596282-32526-6-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <50C1E38F.2020108@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <50C1E38F.2020108@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00166.txt.bz2 On 12/07/2012 08:39 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > I don't understand this part. Why do we get two notifications? Different calls to the > breakpoint_modified observers? This also relates to the "installed" field being present > or not for pending breakpoints issue I pointed out in a previous patch. It'd be good to When pending tracepoint is resolved, breakpoint_modified observer is notified, and then, when tracepoint is downloaded, the breakpoint_modified observer is notified again. > see (and test perhaps) this field is output correctly in the case of a tracepoint with multiple > locations. > Sure, but it is covered by other test cases, such as gdb.trace/change-loc.exp. >> > -re ".*${mi_gdb_prompt}$" { >> > fail $test >> >@@ -210,7 +224,7 @@ proc test_pending_resolved { } { with_test_prefix "pending resolved" { >> > mi_send_resuming_command "exec-continue" "continuing to exit" >> > set test "tracepoint on pendfunc2 becomes pending again" >> > gdb_expect { >> >- -re ".*=breakpoint-modified,bkpt=\{number=\"1\",type=\"tracepoint\".*addr=\"\",.*times=\"0\"" { >> >+ -re ".*=breakpoint-modified,bkpt=\{number=\"1\",type=\"tracepoint\".*addr=\"\",.*times=\"0\".*installed=\"n\"" { >> > pass "$test" >> > } > Also related. It very much feels to me that installed or not is a location property, not a > breakpoint property. So if the breakpoint is pending, it doesn't have any location at all, > and then it feels strange to me to include an "installed" attribute. WDYT? > Agreed. I'll remove it for pending tracepoint. -- Yao (齐尧)