This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: [infrun.c] Fix to "nexti".
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: RFA: [infrun.c] Fix to "nexti".
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:22:48 -0500
- References: <3A54D5D2.CCA3E45E@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 02:58:10PM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
>A "nexti" inside a function prologue currently == continue.
>This has been broken for quite a while (24-Oct-95).
>
>Here is the fix.
>
> * infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Handle "nexti" inside function
> prologues.
>
>--
>Fernando Nasser
>Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com
>2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
>Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9
>Index: infrun.c
>===================================================================
>RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/infrun.c,v
>retrieving revision 1.277
>diff -c -p -r1.277 infrun.c
>*** infrun.c 2000/02/29 07:17:52 1.277
>--- infrun.c 2001/01/04 19:39:44
>*************** handle_inferior_event (struct execution_
>*** 2738,2748 ****
> {
> /* It's a subroutine call. */
>
>! if (step_over_calls == STEP_OVER_NONE)
> {
> /* I presume that step_over_calls is only 0 when we're
> supposed to be stepping at the assembly language level
> ("stepi"). Just stop. */
> stop_step = 1;
> print_stop_reason (END_STEPPING_RANGE, 0);
> stop_stepping (ecs);
>--- 2738,2753 ----
> {
> /* It's a subroutine call. */
>
>! if ((step_over_calls == 0)
>! || ((step_range_end == 1)
>! && in_prologue (prev_pc, ecs->stop_func_start)))
Shouldn't that be "step_over_calls == STEP_OVER_NONE", Fernando?
Elena asked me to change step_over_calls to use enums a while ago when
I submitted the step-mode patch.
cgf