From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30691 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2012 18:52:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 30676 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2012 18:52:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,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; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:52:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8AIq6ca026777 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:52:07 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8AIq59R008779 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:52:06 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Yao Qi Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH] traceframe_changed observer and MI notification References: <1346404195-20864-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1346404195-20864-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> (Yao Qi's message of "Fri, 31 Aug 2012 17:09:55 +0800") Message-ID: <87k3w1d82y.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (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: 2012-09/txt/msg00133.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi writes: Yao> Regression tested on x86_64-linux native and gdbserver. OK? The idea seems fine to me. Yao> +@item =traceframe-changed,num=@var{tfnum},tracepoint=@var{tpnum} Yao> +@itemx =traceframe-changed,end Yao> +Reports that the traceframe is changed and its number is @var{tfnum}. Yao> +or @value{GDBN} stops examining traceframes and resumes live debugging. Yao> +The number of the tracepoint associated with this traceframe is Yao> +@var{tpnum}. That should be a comma and not a period before "or". Yao> +static void Yao> +mi_traceframe_changed (int tfnum, int tpnum) This function needs an introductory comment. It can be brief. Yao> + target_terminal_ours (); Yao> + Yao> + if (mi_suppress_notification.traceframe) Yao> + return; It seems to me that checking suppression first is probably better. Tom