From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26586 invoked by alias); 29 Nov 2011 16:15:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 26577 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Nov 2011 16:15:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:15:24 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pATGFNF7026737 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:15:23 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pATGFNtF011656; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:15:23 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pATGFMqm031935; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:15:22 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: one-too-many location in breakpoint References: <20111123163917.GA13809@adacore.com> <20111123232406.GQ13809@adacore.com> <20111124105603.GA91879@adacore.com> <20111124163304.GR13809@adacore.com> <20111129033329.GS24943@adacore.com> Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 16:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20111129033329.GS24943@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:33:29 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2011-11/txt/msg00820.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> I have a testcase where inserting a breakpoint causes one too many Joel> location. I haven't investigated why that is. That'll be next on Joel> my list. Joel> And I have another testcase where we also have an unexpected second Joel> location, but I think that this might be because I forgot to contribute Joel> some changes. It has to do with broken debug information due to Joel> linker bugs with -ffunction-sections. I haven't investigated either. Joel> And I think that's all! So, as you see, I think we're really close. Joel> I'll continue working on these two tomorrow... I fixed all the other problems. I'm running a regression test to make sure I didn't make something else break while doing this. If all goes well I will send out refreshed patches. I'm happy to help look at the remaining problems, just send the info. Tom