Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdbserver gnu/linux: stepping over breakpoint
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 15:25:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <552699C8.9070001@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55269925.8090704@redhat.com>

On 04/09/2015 04:22 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 04/09/2015 04:06 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
>> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> even reached.  The test isn't even threaded.  It sounds like
>>> gdbserver is trying to step over the breakpoint at "foo"?  Didn't
>>> gdb itself step over it?  How come that was reached in gdbserver?
>>> Did we mishandle the breakpoint's reference count in gdbserver?
>>
>> Shouldn't GDBserver step over breakpoint when the target side condition
>> is false?
> 
> Oh, this is stepping past an hardware breakpoint, not software
> breakpoint.  Yes, GDBserver should be stepping past such
> breakpoints.  But, given GDBserver's software single-step
> support is really really really really too simple:
> 
> /* We only place breakpoints in empty marker functions, and thread locking
>    is outside of the function.  So rather than importing software single-step,
>    we can just run until exit.  */
> static CORE_ADDR
> arm_reinsert_addr (void)
> {
>   struct regcache *regcache = get_thread_regcache (current_thread, 1);
>   unsigned long pc;
>   collect_register_by_name (regcache, "lr", &pc);
>   return pc;
> }
> 
> ... we should probably disable target side conditions on software
> single-step gdbserver ports.  E.g., try "si" through this function:

Sorry, "si" probably works as gdb steps over the breakpoint
itself.  Try "step" or "next" instead, which kick in the range
stepping support, which then causes gdbserver to handle the
step-over itself.

> 
>    void
>    function ()
>    {
>      i = 0;
>      i = 0; // set cond breakpoint that evals false here
>      i = 0;
>    }
> 
> I'd guess the "si" over the breakpoint ends in the caller
> of "function"...

Thanks,
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-09 15:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-09  8:45 Yao Qi
2015-04-09  9:04 ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-09  9:25   ` Yao Qi
2015-04-09  9:26 ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-09 15:06   ` Yao Qi
2015-04-09 15:22     ` Pedro Alves
2015-04-09 15:25       ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2015-04-09 15:29         ` Pedro Alves

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=552699C8.9070001@redhat.com \
    --to=palves@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox