From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-33411-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 1960 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2008 21:37:11 -0000
Received: (qmail 1952 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2008 21:37:10 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.45.13)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:36:35 +0000
Received: from wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.65]) 	by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id mB4LaXQ6009442 	for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 13:36:33 -0800
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rvbk29.prod.google.com [10.140.87.29]) 	by wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id mB4LaVHt005793 	for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2008 13:36:32 -0800
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id k29so4272934rvb.8         for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:36:31 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.141.176.16 with SMTP id d16mr7160343rvp.120.1228426591685;  	Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:36:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <200812042123.16654.pedro@codesourcery.com>
References: <20081204201837.29DF91C7A10@localhost> 	 <200812042123.16654.pedro@codesourcery.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:37:00 -0000
Message-ID: <e394668d0812041336w4a76a857g116e1eeb9bd020de@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: call_function_by_hand doesn't restore target async?
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-12/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> In practice, and
> especially with non-stop mode, making infcalls async is ranging somewhere
> from hard to impossible.

If that's the general consensus, at least for now, would there be any
objection to submitting a patch that has call_function_by_hand invoke
proceed() in a TRY_CATCH?  After cleaning things up it could rethrow.
It would greatly simplify the semantic load of what one has to deal
with there, and allow for easier fixing of some bugs in the process.