From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5587 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2010 07:58:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 5574 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jun 2010 07:58:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f169.google.com) (74.125.82.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:58:49 +0000 Received: by wyf28 with SMTP id 28so604715wyf.0 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.90.211 with SMTP id e61mr773091wef.1.1276243127269; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:58:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.167.144 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 00:58:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100610203913.GA11204@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100503200201.GB30386@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201005232240.17414.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20100604191855.GA29142@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201006071250.31842.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20100607134011.GA10971@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100610203913.GA11204@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> From: Frederic Riss Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:58:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] Clear stale specific locs, not whole bpts [rediff] To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2010-06/txt/msg00256.txt.bz2 On 10 June 2010 22:39, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > :-( =A0I was wrong and not precise enough checking for my: > > On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:18:55 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > # Other bs->breakpoint_at->owner dereferencing code either checks it is N= ULL > # or such code cannot meet bpstat referencing moribund bp_location. > > Is this patch OK? =A0I understand the former Pedro A.'s suggested way wou= ld not > have this regression. I didn't review the patch, but I tested it and I can confirm that it fixes the issue and does not regress for me. Fred