From: Wu Zhou <woodzltc@cn.ibm.com>
To: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: A little patch for two comments in infrun.c
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:14:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0605301602590.2773@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
Hi,
I am reading the source of infrun.c, and having a couple questions about
two comments in the code:
First, in resume (int step, enum target_signal sig), one comment says:
/* FIXME: calling breakpoint_here_p (read_pc ()) three times! */
Does this still make sense? In function resume, there does exist three
call for breakpoint_here_p (read_pc ()). But read_pc () might return
various values at various points. The breakpoint chain maintained in
this function might also change as the execution proceeds. So I am
thinking this comment doesn't make sense here. Am I right? Any error,
feel free to correct me.
I also think the comment in the following code (in handle_inferior_event)
should be changed.
/* If it's a new process, add it to the thread database */
ecs->new_thread_event = (!ptid_equal (ecs->ptid, inferior_ptid)
&& !ptid_equal (ecs->ptid, minus_one_ptid)
&& !in_thread_list (ecs->ptid));
IMHO, "new thread" describes more properly about the code.
I have a patch for the above two comments.
--- infrun.c.orig 2006-05-29 23:52:47.000000000 -0700
+++ infrun.c 2006-05-29 23:53:24.000000000 -0700
@@ -531,9 +531,6 @@ resume (int step, enum target_signal sig
fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, "infrun: resume (step=%d, signal=%d)\n",
step, sig);
- /* FIXME: calling breakpoint_here_p (read_pc ()) three times! */
-
-
/* Some targets (e.g. Solaris x86) have a kernel bug when stepping
over an instruction that causes a page fault without triggering
a hardware watchpoint. The kernel properly notices that it shouldn't
@@ -1290,7 +1287,7 @@ handle_inferior_event (struct execution_
flush_cached_frames ();
- /* If it's a new process, add it to the thread database */
+ /* If it's a new thread, add it to the thread database */
ecs->new_thread_event = (!ptid_equal (ecs->ptid, inferior_ptid)
&& !ptid_equal (ecs->ptid, minus_one_ptid)
OK to commit?
Regards
- Wu Zhou
next reply other threads:[~2006-05-30 8:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-30 17:14 Wu Zhou [this message]
2006-05-30 18:40 ` Jim Blandy
2006-05-30 18:48 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0605301602590.2773@localhost.localdomain \
--to=woodzltc@cn.ibm.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox