Re: [patch/rfc] Disable [eE] packets by default

[fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler)]

msnyder wrote:

> [...]  I think this is the right thing to do.  [...]

OK.  Can you or Andrew explain the reference to "threading code" in
the patch comments?

> > +  /* Disable by default.  The ``e'' packet has nasty interactions with
> > +     the threading code - it relies on global state.  */
> > +  remote_protocol_E.detect = CMD_AUTO_BOOLEAN_FALSE;
> > +  update_packet_config (&remote_protocol_E);



> I would like to start discussing the right way to implement this.
> For one thing, the current implementation has remote.c snatching
> control away from infrun, and doing something completely 
> different from what infrun asked it to do.  

Right - it's interpreting the step=1 argument to remote_resume not
just as "stepi" but as "step if you can, stepi if you can't".


> I'd like to have the decision about whether to use step-over-range
> made in infrun, not in the target layer.

Yup.  One less-pessimistic approach would be to clear step_range_end
and step_range_start in proceed(), if the breakpoint_here_p()
condition is true.  This would mean that targets would have to do
stepi loops when stepping off of a breakpoint, but otherwise could use
step-over-range.


- FChE