From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20231 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2008 18:50:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 20223 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jun 2008 18:50:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout7.012.net.il (HELO mtaout7.012.net.il) (84.95.2.19) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:50:33 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([80.230.28.131]) by i-mtaout7.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0K2500EFOQ6JXL00@i-mtaout7.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sun, 08 Jun 2008 21:32:44 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:50:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [patch] Warn on constant value watchpoints In-reply-to: <20080608180909.GA6199@caradoc.them.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <20080608155302.GA25486@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20080608180909.GA6199@caradoc.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00145.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 14:09:09 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 09:04:43PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > (gdb) watch 0x4343548 > > > Watchpoint 1: 70530376 > > > > Should we allow such watchpoints? under what circumstances are they > > useful? > > In my opinion, we should not allow such watchpoints. I agree. Does anyone disagree? If not, Jan, could you rework your patch accordingly?