From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-100138-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 6259 invoked by alias); 2 Apr 2013 18:05:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 6212 invoked by uid 89); 2 Apr 2013 18:05:49 -0000
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 18:05:47 +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 r32I5i1S029649	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Tue, 2 Apr 2013 14:05:44 -0400
Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (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 r32I5hs3016921	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);	Tue, 2 Apr 2013 14:05:43 -0400
Message-ID: <515B1DF7.3090705@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 03:34:00 -0000
From: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120605 Thunderbird/13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
CC: Hui Zhu <hui_zhu@mentor.com>, gdb-patches ml <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix dprintf work not right if it is pending
References: <514BF736.3070706@mentor.com> <514C3C85.4000704@codesourcery.com> <514EEBFF.8090705@redhat.com> <CANFwon3D77yDiB_bQ0iZeg=KpkwoGiKnu=_7+kfcVV547M_cfg@mail.gmail.com> <5154378D.60302@redhat.com> <CANFwon3OdcsC3PQRwteYPKiBYFFKGPcOfMVcc4Fx8XdjZ=-pQw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANFwon3OdcsC3PQRwteYPKiBYFFKGPcOfMVcc4Fx8XdjZ=-pQw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2

On 03/29/2013 12:42 AM, Hui Zhu wrote:

>>> +  breakpoint_re_set_default (b);
>>> +
>>> +  if (b->extra_string != NULL)
>>> +    update_dprintf_command_list (b);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>>
>> This will update the command list every time breakpoints are reset and could
>> be limited to only those needing updating. Is there perhaps a reason to
>> always do this?
>
> I think it need, because it need to generate different commands with
> different status for example:
>        if (target_can_run_breakpoint_commands ())
> 	printf_line = xstrprintf ("agent-printf %s", dprintf_args);
>

I'm not understanding this example. How is this likely to change 
whenever breakpoints are reset? Is there perhaps a way to add a test to 
demonstrate this requirement?

Otherwise, this patch looks good to me, and recommend that a maintainer 
give this a final review.

Keith