This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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: [RFA] thread specific breakpoints and single stepping

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
To: Emi SUZUKI <emi-suzuki at tjsys dot co dot jp>
Cc: pedro at codesourcery dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:01:33 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFA] thread specific breakpoints and single stepping
References: <20080708.114916.68479315.emi-suzuki@tjsys.co.jp> <200807082105.02583.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20080709.211038.135588294.emi-suzuki@tjsys.co.jp>

On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:10:38PM +0900, Emi SUZUKI wrote:
> It works better than mine.  But while I am concerning about
> single-stepping for software watchpoints, I noticed that we should
> also check whether a hardware watchpoint is triggered.  

As this condition gets more complicated, I'm getting worried about
keeping it in sync with everything else.  Could it be that the logic
is wrong - we should determine whether a thread hop is necessary later
in the process?  It should be just like a breakpoint with a false
condition.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

References:
- [RFA] thread specific breakpoints and single stepping
  - From: Ems SUZUKI
- Re: [RFA] thread specific breakpoints and single stepping
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: [RFA] thread specific breakpoints and single stepping
  - From: Emi SUZUKI

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