From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 51321 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2015 09:51:35 -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 51310 invoked by uid 89); 8 Apr 2015 09:51:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pa0-f44.google.com Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f44.google.com) (209.85.220.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 09:51:33 +0000 Received: by pabsx10 with SMTP id sx10so109714453pab.3 for ; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:51:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.253.225 with SMTP id ad1mr44848921pad.65.1428486692032; Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from E107787-LIN (gcc1-power7.osuosl.org. [140.211.15.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id zi10sm10859514pab.35.2015.04.08.02.51.29 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Apr 2015 02:51:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Yao Qi To: Pedro Alves Cc: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Honour software single step in fallback of displaced stepping References: <1428421925-18025-1-git-send-email-qiyaoltc@gmail.com> <55240CE7.2080506@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 09:51:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <55240CE7.2080506@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:59:19 +0100") Message-ID: <86iod7vtgg.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves writes: > They actually are. :-) I tested v2 against x86 software single-step, > and it caught issues like that. Yeah, I realised that when I apply your V2 on top of my patches later yesterday for the testing. I tested your V2 only, and fails in=20 gdb.threads/non-stop-fair-events.exp go away! > This patch: > > [PATCH v2 07/23] Embed the pending step-over chain in thread_info objects > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-04/msg00218.html > > splits that code you're touching to a separate "start_step_over_inferior" > function. > > And then this patch: > > [PATCH v2 11/23] Use keep_going in proceed and start_step_over too > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-04/msg00203.html > > rewrites that whole function to defer to keep_going instead. keep_going > already handles the case of the breakpoint disappearing > (thread_still_needs_step_over > returns false). And in case the breakpoint is still around, it ends > in 'resume' again, which is then the only place that knows > how to start a displaced step. OK, I'll read the corresponding patches then. > > I don't mind if you push your patch in first. I'll just > end up deleting that code again when I rebase it. I'll let your patches go in. --=20 Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)