Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole.

Mark Kettenis
2007-04-12T20:16:57Z

> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:09:10 +0200 (CEST)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
>
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 07:16:14PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > I would think the "write_pc (next_pc)" statement in the
> > > !insert_breakpoints_p case should be unnecessary. This should
> > > already have been taken care of by infrun, shouldn't it?
> >
> > I'm afraid I don't know what this is for. You're probably correct,
> > though.
>
> I'd say we should remove it. The use of the contents of the
> static variable next_pc from a previous invocation strikes me
> as suspect anyway -- what if we're in another thread now?

I suspect the write_pc call is there to make stepping delay-slot
instructions work.

> I don't have a way to test on alpha-linux unfortunately. Do you?

I can test OpenBSD/alpha later this week if necessary.