Re: MI: reporting of multiple breakpoints

[Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>]

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:

 Daniel> On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:08:41PM -0500, Paul Koning wrote:
 >> My point is that, at least on some of the platforms, a watchpoint
 >> exception will deliver the PC of the instruction doing the store,
 >> or that PC can be deduced.  Therefore, on such platforms, that is
 >> the PC that should be reported, which will make the report point
 >> to the right source line.  Of course, the resume will not resume
 >> there, but GDB already has machinery for that.

 Daniel> I've got no idea what you mean by "GDB already has machinery
 Daniel> for that".  Want to clarify?

I'm referring to various target macros (don't remember the names) that
control whether the PC needs to be advanced before you continue from a
stop.  I remember using some of those when I implemented watchpoint
support on our MIPS platform.

 Daniel> We present a source location based on the current frame,
 Daniel> which is a PC derived from the current register values.  What
 Daniel> you see is what you get when you continue.

Ok, my point is that we can do better.  Your point (previous message)
is that you don't think what I'm suggesting is better.  I guess we'll
just disagree on that.  I prefer to tell users a store happened in a
source line that contains an assignment, rather than a source line
that doesn't.  The fact that some hardware can't do that doesn't alter
that -- we don't and shouldn't just offer lowest common denominator.

	    paul