From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-24398-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22223 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2006 19:52:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 22063 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2006 19:52:27 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:52:25 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-249-121.inter.net.il [84.228.249.121]) 	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) 	with ESMTP id DPD66067 (AUTH halo1); 	Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:52:15 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:55:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uaccnw2hd.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>
CC: ghost@cs.msu.su, gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <17400.46121.875000.537237@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (message from Paul 	Koning on Sun, 19 Feb 2006 13:08:41 -0500)
Subject: Re: MI: reporting of multiple breakpoints
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <20060217153211.GA21402@nevyn.them.org> 	<dt4r7g$h69$1@sea.gmane.org> 	<ulkw9hj1y.fsf@gnu.org> 	<20060217194426.GA28988@nevyn.them.org> 	<ufymhhi81.fsf@gnu.org> 	<17398.11182.747232.774924@gargle.gargle.HOWL> 	<20060217200712.GB30145@nevyn.them.org> 	<17398.12047.624911.347942@gargle.gargle.HOWL> 	<20060217202047.GC30881@nevyn.them.org> 	<17398.15554.431196.208031@gargle.gargle.HOWL> 	<20060217211942.GA609@nevyn.them.org> 	<uslqggbxm.fsf@gnu.org> <17400.46121.875000.537237@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
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: 2006-02/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 13:08:41 -0500
> From: Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>
> Cc: ghost@cs.msu.su, gdb@sources.redhat.com
> 
> My point is that, at least on some of the platforms, a watchpoint
> exception will deliver the PC of the instruction doing the store, or
> that PC can be deduced.

I think this happens on _all_ platforms that support watchpoints.

> Therefore, on such platforms, that is the PC that should be
> reported, which will make the report point to the right source line.

We already do precisely that.

Again, the place that caused the store is known (and shown to the
user), but the place where the inferior is stopped is a different
place on many architectures, including x86.  Wed are arguing about the
latter, not the former.