From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2292 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2010 16:43:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 2279 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2010 16:43:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_GJ,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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, 30 Nov 2010 16:43:32 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAUGhUuW003642 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:43:30 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAUGhUi2019741; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:43:30 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (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 oAUGhTgk021024; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:43:29 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id C207637817F; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 09:43:28 -0700 (MST) From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: next/finish/etc -vs- exceptions References: <20101125075847.GA19270@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:43:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20101125075847.GA19270@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Thu, 25 Nov 2010 08:58:47 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00502.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Thanks for the review. I've made most of the changes you recommended. >> * breakpoint.h (enum bptype) > bp_exception_master> : New constants. Jan> Therefore it is a precent new `bptype's are permitted instead of using Jan> breakpoint_ops (which may need some extensions, not sure). Yeah. Mostly I just copied and then extended the existing longjmp support. I looked briefly at using breakpoint_ops, but it seems like it would require a bunch of new methods that are specific to just this breakpoint. Maybe that is the way to go? Jan> BTW the testcase does not work on neither ppc32 nor on ppc64. Thanks, I will investigate. Jan> tp-> initiating_frame should be initialized from Jan> set_longjmp_breakpoint, as it is required for that operation. I made this change. Jan> It probably should not be placed in TP. If we are Jan> stepping/until-ing/etc. some code and execute some breakpoint's Jan> command list trying to step/next/etc. again already from a Jan> different frame it won't work. But this is a problem for most of Jan> the TP variables already so that's OK for this patch. It should be Jan> carried over from the set-breakpoint to resume-breakpoint Jan> otherwise. I thought that gdb did not support nested inferior-control commands like this. It would be a nice feature. >> + add_continuation (tp, until_next_continuation, tp, NULL); Jan> continuation_free_args is NULL here but I think the breakpoint Jan> should get deleted even if there is some premature thread deletion. Jan> But maybe just all the breakpoints specific for that thread Jan> (clear_thread_inferior_resources) should be deleted which would Jan> also solve this problem? I will try to make a test case so I can see what actually happens in this scenario. Thanks for pointing it out. >> +if { [compile_java_from_source ${srcdir}/$subdir/${srcfile} ${binfile} "-g"] != "" } { >> + untested "Couldn't compile ${srcdir}/$subdir/${srcfile}" >> + return -1 Jan> maybe prepare_for_testing? Jan> (nitpick) I left this as-is. compile_java_from_source does some extra processing right now. Tom