From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8530 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2013 16:36:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 8358 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Feb 2013 16:36:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:35:43 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1LGZdns014341 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:35:39 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1LGZb1N007701 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:35:38 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Yao Qi Cc: Subject: Re: [RFC] PR 15075 dprintf interferes with "next" References: <1361192891-29341-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:36:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1361192891-29341-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> (Yao Qi's message of "Mon, 18 Feb 2013 21:08:11 +0800") Message-ID: <8738wpd3qe.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.92 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg00557.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi writes: Yao> The printf stuff is implemented as command, it is convenient to move Yao> them to the target side. I tried to change the bpstat saying that Yao> "don't stop", but the command can't be executed. We have to keep Yao> bpstat saying that "stop" for dprintf. I also thought about Tom's Yao> suggestion about Python "Breakpoint.stop" API, but "Breakpoint.stop" Yao> acts as condition instead of command, so I don't go that way. Pedro pointed out that 'stop' runs too early -- it makes "cond" not work on a dprintf. (BTW if there is no test for this, there should be... ) But, why not just do the work just after the condition is evaluated? For example, it could be done with special handling in bpstat_check_breakpoint_conditions, or by introducing a new check_condition breakpoint_ops method, with the dprintf method calling the super method before proceeding to "printf" and then returning 0. I tend to think that the "commands" approach is just not a good one. Tom