From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Smith To: Jonathan Larmour Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Thread switching and stepping bug Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 06:33:00 -0000 Message-id: <3AE57FA9.5090009@redhat.com> References: <3AE541F1.C8D1976F@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00175.html Jonathan, If I understand you correctly, you may have hit a problem I'm familiar with. Basically your target (which you didn't mention) hasn't implemented PREPARE_TO_PROCEED which gets called in infrun.c. I submitted a patch back at the end of March to implement a generic PREPARE_TO_PROCEED which should work for most targets. For more details, here's the start of the thread where we discussed this: < http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2001-03/msg00541.html > I hope this helps. Jonathan Larmour wrote: > It seems GDB (a fairly recent CVS) doesn't do the right thing when a thread > view has been switched and then the system stepped. > > I've got a program with a bunch of threads. The default one is thread 3 and > has a function breakme which I set a breakpoint. The other threads run > other stuff. > > If I set a breakpoint on breakme, thread 3 hits it. If I manually step off > that breakpoint, switch to e.g. thread 5 then do another step, GDB can't > recognise that it hit a sensible breakpoint, and instead reports a SIGTRAP. > > So the commands I'm doing are: > > b breakme > c > [ hits breakpoint in thread 3] > step > thread 5 > step > > I'm surprised no-one has noticed this before, so is my understanding wrong? > > I've tried looking in wait_for_inferior() but got lost quickly :-). I think > the problem may be that step_resume_breakpoint is changed when GDB notices > the thread has changed. But I'm no expert. > > Jifl -- David Smith dsmith@redhat.com Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com 256.704.9222 (direct) 256.837.3839 (fax)