From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 96174 invoked by alias); 14 Dec 2019 13:55:01 -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 96166 invoked by uid 89); 14 Dec 2019 13:55:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_STOCKGEN,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=played X-HELO: EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com Received: from mail-oln040092069091.outbound.protection.outlook.com (HELO EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (40.92.69.91) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 13:54:58 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=XGjxPfQfgP3YMOfhd1weVNOOW+MhUj62WbrY0K6PrgC99PNf3/3CAVx7D5J9936QP1vn6nU/fxBtor96PUP1oriC4g1qRK9C+D47/tv4SINcQuW4HinOuyuhGi8kx9a3sNHUFg/yjNkKYDgoHxOU3nX5eP+N7ekEhJLgGudLnNkN4vfVXrQETvb3D2V1ER720DPV7lObl1R8abjvh5Cw5hKD1H7rjjGVqDtiPczWOkvuQ58J99viqMlRQ9r6vSVt+PzrDb8wq+EGmhA/hlVu+RdWGlkyIY1a9pWEcUg1q8Ho0IKFNgUxB6azr4LEaJhwiFjXNxtZ7PAx0dIOmQBtNg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VJGdV1P/y6eFL9wj0cO5ZNsB8rHwck/JAcSQWMaOS+k=; b=Y8+uk9NKvYrDDcTtGg5zolvVOyzwkk+ESULQtX+38uvyRUfLpTqu+2RfJ98prLccHOUNimydDlCy5nKfOfjZEGYziq348b8z99Dx6nBxZrxWeljUby/EP42MY+eInaYbNYfjiXSTKeK8tjtGyXascy6Smuu5ZRhlE7yCJZsNLSA1ZFmTCZlAdp448JkLgFkRkuQcwVZqBbVi+3JbRTN2Dki0Cn2YO8c6Y/bX1P9fzkeeJXZLiyXBTTuoPaomxvERjGP9ORE2Qna1D1UUu1WDzqK58Xj6DAxHxBKfyA6m9LJ6+hqJYjYXWVkTaw6vGNfiubjaOZslM5bLW2HCXGeKJg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none Received: from HE1EUR02FT016.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.10.59) by HE1EUR02HT072.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.11.160) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2538.14; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 13:54:56 +0000 Received: from AM0PR08MB3714.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (10.152.10.53) by HE1EUR02FT016.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.10.124) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2538.14 via Frontend Transport; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 13:54:56 +0000 Received: from AM0PR08MB3714.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8dd1:fb18:6271:f769]) by AM0PR08MB3714.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8dd1:fb18:6271:f769%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2538.019; Sat, 14 Dec 2019 13:54:56 +0000 From: Bernd Edlinger To: Simon Marchi , Pedro Alves , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: [PING] [PATCHv5] Make "skip" work on inline frames Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2019 13:55:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <8fc93db4-8906-4f4e-53f4-225ebfa0115d@simark.ca> <215bbf9c-4c3c-5cd2-c657-51aa7262f234@simark.ca> <8d5b880e-12f2-11ac-1bfe-82941f64369b@simark.ca> In-Reply-To: x-microsoft-original-message-id: <6a417d3e-0609-4314-463d-e38a90b970e6@hotmail.de> x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <3D23EF0950CCBE4B8D34ADDE72C5DF9F@eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2019-12/txt/msg00660.txt.bz2 Ping... The latest version of this patch can be found here: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg00047.html Thanks Bernd. On 12/2/19 5:47 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 12/2/19 3:34 AM, Simon Marchi wrote: >> On 2019-11-24 6:22 a.m., Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>> This is just a minor update on the patch >>> since the function SYMBOL_PRINT_NAME was removed with >>> commit 987012b89bce7f6385ed88585547f852a8005a3f >>> I replaced it with sym->print_name (), otherwise the >>> patch is unchanged. >> >> Hi Bernd, >> >> Sorry, I had lost this in the mailing list noise. >> >> I played a bit with the patch and different cases of figure. I am not a= ble to understand >> the purpose of each of your changes (due to the complexity of that parti= cular code), but >> I didn't find anything that stood out as wrong to me. Pedro might be ab= le to do a more >> in-depth review of the event handling code. >> >> If the test tests specifically skipping of inline functions, I'd name it= something more >> descriptive than "skip2.exp", maybe "skip-inline.exp"? >> >> Unfortunately, your test doesn't pass on my computer (gcc 9.2.0), but ne= ither does the >> gdb.base/skip.exp. I am attaching the gdb.log when running your test, i= f it can help. >> >> Simon >> >=20 > Hi Simon, >=20 > I only tested that with gcc-4.8, and both test cases worked with that gcc= version. >=20 > I tried now with gcc-trunk version from a few days ago, and I think I see > what you mean. >=20 > skip2.c (now skip-inline.c) can be fixed by removing the assignment > to x in the first line, which is superfluous (and copied from skip.c). > But skip.c cannot be fixed this way. I only see a chance to allow > the stepping back to main and then to foo happen. >=20 > Does this modified test case work for you? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks > Bernd. >=20