This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: fix PR backtrace/15558
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>, "gdb-patches\ at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:03:19 -0600
- Subject: Re: RFC: fix PR backtrace/15558
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <87li6nghhz dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <51B11E66 dot 70102 at redhat dot com> <87mwqjw613 dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <CA+=Sn1ko3pK8+2VPgGBeiQ3j1uVWf+sxNXHRrX==ed4L-wCp+w at mail dot gmail dot com> <87ha5vrdki dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <534C2C19 dot 1010503 at redhat dot com> <87tx9vpwvb dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <534C6BDD dot 2090805 at redhat dot com>
>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
Pedro> See patch below. I've simplified your test a bit, and added a test
Pedro> that doesn't depend on Python, to the existing gdb.opt/inline-bt.exp.
Thanks.
Pedro> Not sure. I guess Python code might want to be implementing some
Pedro> new frame-related CLI command, where the limits make sense. Maybe
Pedro> Python should really have access to both variants, somehow?
I was thinking perhaps new methods on the python frame object.
Pedro> PR backtrace/15558
Pedro> * gdb.opt/inline-bt.exp: Test backtracing from an inline function
Pedro> with a backtrace limit.
Pedro> * py-frame-inline.exp: Test running to an inline function with a
Pedro> bactrace limit, and printing the newest frame.
Typo in "backtrace" on the last line.
The patch looks good but the ChangeLog has a missing directory name and
doesn't mention :
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.python/py-frame-inline.c | 4 +++-
Tom