From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22350 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2015 22:22:35 -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 22339 invoked by uid 89); 22 Apr 2015 22:22:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:22:34 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t3MMMVgE021542 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 18:22:31 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t3MMMUvq026288; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 18:22:30 -0400 Message-ID: <55381F25.5080009@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:22:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/17] Use keep_going in proceed and start_step_over too References: <1429267521-21047-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <1429267521-21047-7-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <21815.11476.327167.153546@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> In-Reply-To: <21815.11476.327167.153546@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg00851.txt.bz2 On 04/22/2015 06:08 AM, Doug Evans wrote: > Pedro Alves writes: > > The main motivation of this patch is sharing more code between the > > proceed (starting the inferior for the first time) and keep_going > > (restarting the inferior after handling an event) paths and using the > > step_over_chain queue now embedded in the thread_info object for > > pending in-line step-overs too (instead of just for displaced > > stepping). > > Hi. > A couple of nits inline. > grep for ==== > Thanks. > > + /* keep_going_pass skips the step-over if the breakpoint is no > > + longer inserted. In all-stop, we want to keep looking for a > > ==== > missing word? "... keep looking for a thread" ? Indeed. > > - if (!tp->control.in_infcall) > > - set_running (user_visible_resume_ptid (user_step), 1); > > + if (debug_infrun) > > + fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, > > + "Got placed in displaced stepping queue\n"); > > ==== > Nit: Suggest rewording "displaced stepping queue". > IIUC there is no displaced-stepping specific queue anymore. Fixed: + if (debug_infrun) + fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, + "Got placed in step-over queue\n"); > > -/* Called when we should continue running the inferior, because the > > - current event doesn't cause a user visible stop. This does the > > - resuming part; waiting for the next event is done elsewhere. */ > > +/* Like keep_going, but passes the signal to the inferior, even if the > > + signal is set to nopass. */ > > > > static void > > -keep_going (struct execution_control_state *ecs) > > +keep_going_pass (struct execution_control_state *ecs) > > ==== > For whatever weird reasons, "keep_going_pass" doesn't read very well to me. > "pass" as in "pass/fail"? > "pass" as in one of several passes, and this is the "keep going" one? > > Can you rename this to keep_going_pass_signal? No problem. Done that. Thanks, Pedro Alves