From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-119259-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 875 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2015 15:37:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 794 invoked by uid 89); 22 Jan 2015 15:37:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mail-wi0-f182.google.com
Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com (HELO mail-wi0-f182.google.com) (209.85.212.182) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:37:44 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id n3so4222198wiv.3        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 07:37:41 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.60.19 with SMTP id d19mr4224841wjr.48.1421941061595; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 07:37:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.27.39.198 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Jan 2015 07:37:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <54C0E1FF.4050201@redhat.com>
References: <m33876ary6.fsf@sspiff.org>	<54C0E1FF.4050201@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:37:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAP9bCMSN1GWh15G_XVa5Lp+jenc_F3nF5wGO=D=iaX+Jnd=dxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][PR symtab/17855] Fix.
From: Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com>
To: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00593.txt.bz2

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> Looking at the whole function, ISTM that the breakpoint_re_set
> call should move further down.  I can imagine that breakpoint_re_set
> could well hit a stale pc function cache, cleared only after by
> clear_pc_function_cache.  breakpoint.c:parse_breakpoint_sals also
> references the last displayed sal.  One would hope that breakpoint
> re-set is independent of that, though the existing comment about
> breakpoint_re_set accessing the current symtab leaves me
> wondering.  WDYT?

Fine by me.