From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3262 invoked by alias); 19 Jul 2011 11:14:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 3253 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jul 2011 11:14:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:14:06 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qj8FY-0007Sq-Hj; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 07:14:04 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:52:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Jan Kratochvil CC: drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20110719103055.GA21344@host1.jankratochvil.net> (message from Jan Kratochvil on Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:30:55 +0200) Subject: Re: [RFC 06/12] entryval: Display @entry parameters in bt full Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20110718201852.GG30496@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20110719103055.GA21344@host1.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00458.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:30:55 +0200 > From: Jan Kratochvil > Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > GDB internally knows the value of the parameter at the function entry - to be > able to recover the values. It has been found out the developers may find it > useful to be shown the entry values it. It is an additional feature on top of > the values recovery. But then why don't we just show the value at entry in the function call line? IOW, show this: #8 0x000000000048c50d in execute_command (p=0x22b5720 "maintenance internal-error", from_tty=1) at top.c:438 instead of this: #8 0x000000000048c50d in execute_command (p=0x22b573b "", from_tty=1) at top.c:438 p@entry = 0x22b5720 "maintenance internal-error " Also show those entry-time values in "info args", as you already suggested. This will also fix the annoyance I sometimes bump into, whereby if I type "bt" some time after stepping into a function, the values of the parameters are not necessarily those that were actual at the time of the call (if the function modifies them). > I think it is separated well enough in the patchset, up to incl. 05/12 it is > about values recovery, from 06/12 it is about user-accessible entry values. Sorry, I didn't read the code, only the doco parts and the general discussion. Thanks.