From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29798 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2013 08:10:51 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 29777 invoked by uid 89); 1 Jul 2013 08:10:50 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_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; Mon, 01 Jul 2013 08:10:49 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r618AlNU007949 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 1 Jul 2013 04:10:47 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r618Aj57030643; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 04:10:46 -0400 Message-ID: <51D13985.9020709@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 08:10:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130514 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hui Zhu CC: gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix PR 15180 "May only run agent-printf on the target" References: <51CB2BAA.1070507@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-07/txt/msg00019.txt.bz2 On 06/30/2013 04:17 PM, Hui Zhu wrote: >> > If dprintf style is agent, then the target doesn't report events >> > for such hits. If we happen to see a trap reported for the >> > same address as another breakpoint, the trap is surely not explained >> > by the dprintf. IOW, we shouldn't have a bpstat a dprintf w/ style >> > agent at all. What is need is to override the breakpoint_hit method >> > of dprintf_breakpoint_ops to always return false for agent style dprintfs. >> > >> > Or maybe I'm missing something. I have a hard time going from >> > the bug description in the PR to the patch. > OK. I add dprintf_check_status in the new patch according to your comments. > But I suggested the breakpoint_ops->breakpoint_hit not breakpoint_ops->check_status. An agent-style dprintf is just like a tracepoint. It can't ever explain a stop. See tracepoint_breakpoint_hit. If it didn't work, please explain why. -- Pedro Alves