Re: [PATCH] Fix problems with finishing a dummy function call on simulators.

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 06/09/2015 07:10 PM, Luis Machado wrote:

>> Not exactly sure what to do here.  Maybe we should stop considering
>> permanent and non-permanent breakpoints at the same address as
>> duplicates.  That should result in GDB inserting the non-permanent
>> one, I think.  Or we could get stop marking permanent breakpoints
>> as always inserted, and let normal breakpoints insert on top of
>> permanent breakpoints normally.  See also:
>>   https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-03/msg00174.html
> 
> That sounds a bit hacky.

Can you clarify?  There are two suggestions above, in addition
to a url showing even more ideas.  So I don't know what you're
referring to.  :-)

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having 
> permanent breakpoints in the first place?
> 
> It looks like non-gdbserver targets are not ready to support these 
> tricky constructs/optimizations unfortunately. I'm afraid adding more 
> hacks here and there will cause the code to get even more confusing 
> without a generous amount of code comments. And i'm not even sure the 
> bp_finish check is the best solution either. After all, there is the 
> stepi case too.
> 
> We could probably fix the simulators, but then again there are 
> proprietary ones we cannot easily fix.