From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30537 invoked by alias); 17 Sep 2013 19:36:00 -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 30528 invoked by uid 89); 17 Sep 2013 19:36:00 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:36:00 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HJZuqI021968 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:35:56 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r8HJZsuv024389; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:35:55 -0400 Message-ID: <5238AF1A.4070000@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 19:36:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Muhammad Waqas Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR gdb/11568 - delete thread-specific breakpoints on thread exit References: <521CF7D0.5040801@redhat.com> <1377692710-2885-1-git-send-email-mwaqas@codesourcery.com> <5224C0EB.3000503@redhat.com> <5224C238.2060106@redhat.com> <871u4ykmgq.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <871u4ykmgq.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-09/txt/msg00549.txt.bz2 On 09/09/2013 05:07 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> Here it is. Let me know what you all think. > > It looks good to me. Thanks. I've checked it in now. > Pedro> There's no way that breakpoint can trigger again (*), so the PR argues > Pedro> that the breakpoint should just be removed, like local watchpoints. > Pedro> I'm ambivalent on this -- it could be reasonable to disable the > Pedro> breakpoint (kind of like breakpoint in shared library code when the > Pedro> DSO is unloaded), so the user could still use it as visual template > Pedro> for creating other breakpoints (copy/paste command lists, etc.), or we > Pedro> could have a way to change to which thread a breakpoint applies. But, > Pedro> several people pushed this direction, and I don't plan on arguing... > > I've sometimes wished for a way to modify a breakpoint in place. > There may be another PR about this. > But it's fine to put in this patch now and remove it again later if > anyone actually implements breakpoint modification. Yeah. -- Pedro Alves