From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3599 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2010 20:15:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 3589 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2010 20:15:40 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 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, 30 Nov 2010 20:15:30 +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 (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAUKFTvL013583 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:15:29 -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 oAUKFSpN013326; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:15:28 -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 oAUKFRA9009492; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:15:28 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5C5343780EF; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:15:27 -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 20:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Tom Tromey's message of "Tue, 30 Nov 2010 09:43:28 -0700") 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/msg00511.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey writes: >>> + 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? Tom> I will try to make a test case so I can see what actually happens in Tom> this scenario. Thanks for pointing it out. Good catch here, we were leaving around the exception breakpoints. Calling delete_longjmp_breakpoint from clear_thread_inferior_resources worked for me. I'm not 100% confident that this is the correct fix though. Tom