Re: MI *stopped versus silent breakpoint

[teawater <teawater@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 17:25, Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 05 February 2009 11:09:56 teawater wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> I read the source code in infcmd.c:finish_backward.
>> This is because function "proceed" will be call twice in
>> "finish_backward". Maybe MI output depend some
>> observer_notify_target_xxx function. So it output twice.
>
> The *stopped notification is output as result of call to
>
>        observer_notify_normal_stop
>
> which is done in infrun.c:normal_stop. I do believe that "silent" breakpoint
> should generate *stopped, since otherwise frontend will assume the target is
> running. Furthermore, I believe that silent breakpoints, in MI, should behave
> identically to ordinary breakpoints -- as it stands, we print *stopped without
> frame information.
>
>
> I don't know why a silent breakpoint is used in implementation of reverse-finish,
> nor do I understand why normal_stop is called in the middle of reverse-finish when
> stopping on that temporary breakpoint. I think the first fix it to make reverse-finish
> not to call normal_stop on that internal breakpoint (just like normal_stop is not
> called on solib load breakpoint).

The normal_stop is called twice in reverse-finish because
finish_backward call "proceed" twice, "proceed" call normal_stop.

Hui