From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10016 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2008 18:30:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 10008 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2008 18:30:24 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com) (65.113.40.141) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Oct 2008 18:29:48 +0000 Received: from mailhost3.vmware.com (mailhost3.vmware.com [10.16.27.45]) by smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C3C6A2A; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 11:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.92.59] (promb-2s-dhcp59.eng.vmware.com [10.20.92.59]) by mailhost3.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19861C9A10; Fri, 3 Oct 2008 11:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48E6644F.80604@vmware.com> Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2008 18:30:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: "gdb@sourceware.org" , teawater Subject: Re: Some ideas of displaced step function References: <48E567FA.7010201@vmware.com> <200810031453.16952.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200810031453.16952.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00024.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On Friday 03 October 2008 01:31:54, Michael Snyder wrote: > >> Why are we using displaced-stepping when we're not async? > > s/async/non-stop mode/g. All-stop + async doesn't need > it either. This feature was added for non-stop, as a way to > avoid lifting breakpoints from the inferior when stepping over > a breakpoint, otherwise, other running threads could miss them. > > No other reason to have it always on other than for more > exposure, I guess. Time to pull the plug? > > I'd still like to have a way to enable displaced-stepping > in all-stop mode, as it's very useful for testing. I certainly don't mind 'enable', but maybe it doesn't need to always be enabled by default?