From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-27732-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 25290 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2003 06:09:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 25282 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2003 06:09:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO monty-python.gnu.org) (199.232.76.173)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Oct 2003 06:09:11 -0000
Received: from [207.232.27.5] (helo=WST0054)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with asmtp (Exim 4.24)
	id 1A7Tyn-0000eU-ND; Thu, 09 Oct 2003 02:08:53 -0400
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 06:09:00 -0000
Message-Id: <ubrsraql5.fsf@elta.co.il>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
CC: jimb@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com,msnyder@redhat.com
In-reply-to: <20031008190502.GA13579@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel
	Jacobowitz on Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:05:02 -0400)
Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8]
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>
References: <20031008165534.GA8718@nevyn.them.org> <vt27k3ffvv5.fsf@zenia.home> <20031008190502.GA13579@nevyn.them.org>
X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2

> Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:05:02 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
> > 
> > (gdb) info break
> > Num Type           Disp Enb Address    What
> > 1   breakpoint     keep y   0x08048354 in foo::foo (in-charge) at hello.c:8
> >                             0x08048364 in foo::foo (not-in-charge) at hello.c:8
> > (gdb) 
> 
> Here's the problem that I see.
> 
> For foo::foo, there are two of these things.  Having them both in the
> list would be nice.  Really nice.
> 
> For inline_accessor_fn there are 3.8 million.  In addition to needing
> to do a whole lot of work on GDB internals before we could survive this
> (memory usage; ptrace thrashing inserting and removing them; linked
> lists of breakpoints; and that's just the beginning) this has some
> severe user interface implications.  We don't want to print out all
> those addresses by default!
> 
> I'm open to suggestions on how to deal with this.

How about a switch to "info break"?  By default, show only the
in-charge breakpoint, but if the user says "info break -all" or some
such, show the other 3.8 million minus one.