From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-30323-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 28629 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2007 19:24:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 28616 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Nov 2007 19:24:24 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:24:10 +0000
Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 	by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9EDD98349; 	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:24:08 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) 	by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C69E1980A7; 	Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:24:08 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) 	(envelope-from <drow@caradoc.them.org>) 	id 1IwjYt-00047z-Tr; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:24:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:24:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@specifix.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Questionable breakpoint stepping code
Message-ID: <20071126192407.GB15559@caradoc.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>, 	Michael Snyder <msnyder@specifix.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
References: <fi6m64$qav$1@ger.gmane.org> <1196102967.2501.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200711262216.27906.vladimir@codesourcery.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200711262216.27906.vladimir@codesourcery.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:16:27PM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> > As for your last question, no, I don't believe we approve
> > of ifdefs...
> 
> Well, the question, then is -- how do we make this code work
> correctly even if the instruction at PC is not 4 bytes in size?
> Calling disassembler seems a plausible approach.

Don't Do It.  Just call error, I suggest.  Skipping an instruction
can lead to bizarre failures later.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery