From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22972 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2013 07:32:46 -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 22963 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jun 2013 07:32:45 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mail-oa0-f50.google.com (HELO mail-oa0-f50.google.com) (209.85.219.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:32:44 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id k7so3011987oag.37 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:32:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.60.173.168 with SMTP id bl8mr6969640oec.91.1371454363036; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:32:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.137.196 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:32:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1361192891-29341-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <8738wpd3qe.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <5176C14B.6010603@redhat.com> <51774714.9060306@codesourcery.com> <51969A92.80003@redhat.com> <519CBE2B.7060007@redhat.com> <51ACD6ED.7040604@redhat.com> From: Hui Zhu Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] PR 15075 dprintf interferes with "next" To: Pedro Alves Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Keith Seitz , Yao Qi Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00367.txt.bz2 Ping http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-06/msg00139.html Thanks, Hui On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Hui Zhu wrote: > Hi Pedro, > > Thanks for your review. > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 06/03/2013 05:06 AM, Hui Zhu wrote: >>> Ping http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-05/msg00958.html >>> >> >> As this exposes the non-stop racy failure, we should fix it that one >> first. Failing that, we should kfail or skip the test with >> remote targets. Let's consider the latter option later if we don't >> manage to address the race timely. As I said on: >> >> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-05/msg01111.html >> >> I'm investigating this. I have a prototype patch, but I need >> a bit more to handle some details, like what to do with >> signal catchpoints when we find threads had been stopped with >> a signal (I'm currently thinking of skipping the catchpoints). >> I'm composing a test to exercise/expose this kind of stuff, >> for a better RFC. > > I add a check in the begin of dprintf-non-stop.exp. Then if the > target in remote, this test will not support. > > Please help me review it. > > Thanks, > Hui > > 2013-06-07 Yao Qi > Hui Zhu > Pedro Alves > > PR breakpoints/15075 > PR breakpoints/15434 > * breakpoint.c (bpstat_stop_status): Call > b->ops->after_condition_true. > (update_dprintf_command_list): Don't append "continue" command > to the command list of dprintf breakpoint. > (base_breakpoint_after_condition_true): New function. > (base_breakpoint_ops): Add base_breakpoint_after_condition_true. > (dprintf_create_breakpoints_sal, > dprintf_after_condition_true): New functions. > (initialize_breakpoint_ops): Set dprintf_create_breakpoints_sal > and dprintf_after_condition_true. > * breakpoint.h (breakpoint_ops): Add after_condition_true. > > 2013-06-07 Yao Qi > Hui Zhu > > PR breakpoints/15075 > PR breakpoints/15434 > * gdb.base/dprintf-next.c: New file. > * gdb.base/dprintf-next.exp: New file. > * gdb.base/dprintf-non-stop.c: New file. > * gdb.base/dprintf-non-stop.exp: New file. > * gdb.base/dprintf.exp: Don't check "continue" in the output > of "info breakpoints". > * gdb.mi/mi-breakpoint-changed.exp (test_insert_delete_modify): > Don't check "continue" in script field.