From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29197 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2003 17:47:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29189 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2003 17:47:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.129.200.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Jun 2003 17:47:00 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ACCF2B5F; Thu, 26 Jun 2003 13:46:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3EFB318E.8030809@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 17:47:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Thomas,Stephen" Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, "Bowers, Antony" , "McGoogan,Sean" Subject: Re: Dummy Breakpoint Priority References: <9FF3133289A7A84E81E2ED8F5E56B379604398@sh-uk-ex01.uk.w2k.superh.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00493.txt.bz2 > Hi, > > I am currently porting gdb to the new SuperH SH5 architecture. I have just hit a problem, which sounds exactly the same as that reported on 31 Aug 2001 (by Jiri Smid, titled 'Dummy Breakpoint Priority'). > > When a target function is called from the command line, a special dummy breakpoint is inserted at the program entry point. (We have CALL_DUMMY_LOCATION defined as AT_ENTRY_POINT). Trouble is, when the program is statically linked, gdb has already placed an internal breakpoint at _start, of type bp_shlib_event. On return from the function, this causes bpstat_what() in breakpoint.c to return an action which causes gdb to carry on executing (what.main_action = BPSTAT_WHAT_CHECK_SHLIBS). > > The reply to Jiri Smid's mail asked why solib-svr4.c was setting a bp on the entry point. But it looks like this is the normal thing for gdb to do - I verified that x86 gdb does the same thing (it doesn't suffer from this problem though because it doesn't use AT_ENTRY_POINT). Are you sure that the i386 isn't using at AT_ENTRY_POINT? > So please can anyone tell me what the resolution of this problem was? > NB: Please reply using 'Reply All' as I am leaving SuperH shortly... I'm puzzled to. Andrew