From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11945 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2012 14:20:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 11937 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Dec 2012 14:20:54 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 14:20:46 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qB7EKhwq001906 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:20:45 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qB7EKghX010327; Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:20:42 -0500 Message-ID: <50C1FB3A.8050802@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2012 14:20:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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> <50C1F553.8030502@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <50C1F553.8030502@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00169.txt.bz2 On 12/07/2012 01:55 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > 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. Okay. Could you add a comment mentioning this in the test? Thanks, -- Pedro Alves