Re: [RFA] Patch to fix "reverse-next" command error

teawater
2009-01-30T04:11:42Z

Hi Marc,

Could you please send more message about your issue?

Thanks,
Hui

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 04:27, Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I just noticed I still have the problem of jumping library functions
> when using reverse-step. Seems ok for reverse-next.
>
> Thanks
>
> Marc
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
>> [mailto:gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Marc Khouzam
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 5:38 AM
>> To: teawater; Michael Snyder; Pedro Alves
>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Subject: RE: [RFA] Patch to fix "reverse-next" command error
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> just to confirm that this fixes the problem for me.
>>
>> Thanks teawater
>>
>> Marc
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: teawater [mailto:teawater@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thu 1/22/2009 4:00 AM
>> To: Michael Snyder; Pedro Alves
>> Cc: Marc Khouzam; gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Subject: [RFA] Patch to fix "reverse-next" command error
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> This patch is for bug in
>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2009-01/msg00146.html
>>
>> This issue is because sometime the inferior is already in function
>> start address (i.e. plt), set a breakpoint and continue will make
>> "reverse-next" work error.
>>
>> This patch make inferior step if it reverse step and stop at the
>> function start address.
>> It tested OK with process record patch and testsuite gdb.twreverse in
>> branch reverse-20081226-branch.
>>
>> 2009-01-22 Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
>>
>> * infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Make inferior step if it
>> stepping over a function call in reverse , and stop at the
>> start address of the function.
>>
>> OK for mainline?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hui
>>
>>
>>
>