From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63160 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2016 22:34:18 -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 63143 invoked by uid 89); 15 Apr 2016 22:34:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=our 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; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 22:34:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 204DC3138; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 22:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u3FMYEjE030939; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 18:34:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Break at each iteration for breakpoints placed on a while statement To: Kevin Buettner , Yao Qi References: <20150818235334.1afb0c85@pinnacle.lan> <86zit9nzac.fsf@gmail.com> <570FC5BB.6060103@codesourcery.com> <86zisvkrqg.fsf@gmail.com> <20160415124832.62f1bf28@pinnacle.lan> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Luis Machado From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <57116C66.6050701@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 22:34:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160415124832.62f1bf28@pinnacle.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00370.txt.bz2 On 04/15/2016 08:48 PM, Kevin Buettner wrote: > If the compiler could arrange to set `is_stmt' to false for that > inital branch, we could more easily arrange for GDB to not place a > break on that initial branch. It might even "just work" without any > additional coding on our part. > > One of my colleagues within Red Hat looked at this and came up with a > gcc patch, but it turned out to cause breakage elsewhere. I still > think it makes sense to try to tackle this problem from the compiler > side though. Was a gcc bug ever filed for this? Thanks, Pedro Alves