This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFC: Centralize DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK handling from infrun

On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:38:41PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >The first, possibly most important step in cleaning up 
> >tentacles.  This changes handle_inferior_event to fix the PC immediately,
> >before doing anything else with it.  It removes the later decrements, but
> >doesn't remove all the later workarounds for possibly undecremented PC
> >values - that can come separately.
> >
> >simply
> >removed.  There are no targets using this combination, and if one is added,
> >it's non-obvious whether a nonsteppable watchpoint really should be 
> >affected
> >
> >A future cleanup will change bpstat_stop_status to only take a CORE_ADDR
> >argument.  Also, I believe that both the tests for sigtramps and the use of
> >deprecated_frame_update_pc_hack can go now, but I don't want to mix that in
> >with this - esp. since I'm not sure how to test the former belief.
> Build gdb with gcov and then run the testsuite, it will quickly point 
> you at the "dead" code paths and hence how well it was really tested.

Except, my hunch is it's related to some particular system's broken
PTRACE_SINGLESTEP :(  Well, if it doesn't show up on the systems I have
available I think I'll remove it anyway (after 6.1) - then if we need
to add it back we'll pick up a comment saying why it was necessary.

Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]