From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14163 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2012 17:07:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 14153 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jan 2012 17:07:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,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, 24 Jan 2012 17:07:36 +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 q0OH7ZSu021121 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:07:35 -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 q0OH7ZsE000999; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:07:35 -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 q0OH7XI5009676; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:07:34 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [4/4] RFC: implement catch load and catch unload References: <4F19B998.2030308@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 17:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4F19B998.2030308@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:59:36 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (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: 2012-01/txt/msg00830.txt.bz2 >> + ui_out_field_int (current_uiout, "spurious", 1); Pedro> Do we need "spurious"? We get the same info from neither Pedro> "removed" nor "added" being present. I'm not super fond of using Pedro> the word "spurious" because the stop had some reason, and in my Pedro> mind, something spurious is something that should not have Pedro> happened. But in this case, the stop means something, but we're Pedro> not interpreting it. I removed it. I also removed it from the ui_out_text call. Pedro> Maybe for "catch ...", we shouldn't report a stop in the Pedro> "spurious" case? We don't -- check_status_catch_solib will filter them out. >> - if (shlib_event) Pedro> The shlib_event local should be removed then. Thanks, I did this. I fixed up the other little details too. >> + if (self->base.pspace != NULL && other->pspace != self->base.pspace) >> + continue; Pedro> So a consequence of this is that "catch load" is only active for Pedro> the inferior was current when the catchpoint was created, right? Pedro> Was that the intention? If we already had itsets, we could make Pedro> it trigger on all inferiors by default, and then use itsets to Pedro> filter. I just made it work the way other catchpoints seem to work. They are also pspace-specific. It seemed ok to do this, to me, on the theory that one more spot to change for itsets won't be a big burden; while on the other hand being different here doesn't seem beneficial. Tom