From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-21068-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 31166 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2005 05:12:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 31081 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2005 05:12:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Mar 2005 05:12:52 -0000
Received: from zaretski (IGLD-80-230-68-88.inter.net.il [80.230.68.88])
	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.6-GR)
	with ESMTP id AWD76314 (AUTH halo1);
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:12:46 +0200 (IST)
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 05:12:00 -0000
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
To: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Message-ID: <01c534e6$Blat.v2.4$c8433fa0@zahav.net.il>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
In-reply-to: <20050330002748.GA5882@white> (message from Bob Rossi on Tue, 29
	Mar 2005 19:27:48 -0500)
Subject: Re: [mi] watchpoint-scope exec async command
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <01c53207$Blat.v2.4$3def9b00@zahav.net.il> <20050328225619.GB3413@white> <20050328224101.GA629@nevyn.them.org> <20050328235310.GA3699@white> <20050328230048.GA1697@nevyn.them.org> <20050329014203.GB3801@white> <20050329013634.GB6373@nevyn.them.org> <20050329024945.GC3957@white> <20050329020123.GA7266@nevyn.them.org> <01c534a6$Blat.v2.4$944e44a0@zahav.net.il> <20050330002748.GA5882@white>
X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00295.txt.bz2

> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:27:48 -0500
> From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:29:48PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > [Sorry for a late response: I needed to refresh my memory of how the
> > related code works.]
> 
> Are you serious? That was like the speed of light compared to what I'm
> used to.

I have different standards.

> When running with software breakpoints, the crash does not happen, and
> valgrind is happy. Now, what confuses me is that the memory for the
> related_breakpoint is still deleted in delete_breakpoint and when we 
> set the disposition of the deleted "related_breakpoint" at 
> breakpoint.c:1022(insert_bp_location), things seem to work OK.

I suspect that, since software watchpoints are imlpemented by
single-stepping the inferior, the order of deletion of the watchpoint
and its associated scope breakpoint is different (because the inferior
stops after each instruction).

More in the evening, after I read through the other info you sent.

Thanks.