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: Any solution to not being able to interrupt step in GDB ?

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:44:56PM +0000, Antony KING wrote:
> The signal handler is the restored default handler, "handle_sigint". My  
> target interface only substitutes that default SIGINT handler when  
> implementing the target_wait() functionality (it is modelled on remote.c).
> My first thought was that QUIT should achieve the effect I need but  
> quit_flag, as was pointed out, is not being set soon enough. Also,  
> forcing an immediate_quit is not suitable since I would like to stop the  
> stepping cleanly with a target SIGINT (plus it breaks my target  
> interface, but that is my problem :-).

Why doesn't quit_flag get set?  That's how I think we ought to do
this.  Avoid immediate_quit, that's dangerous to mess with.

I'm not sure why you'd want to use a target SIGINT for this case.
If we're between steps, we should just make sure we don't send
another step.  I suppose I hadn't thought about the case between
stepping and waiting...

Daniel Jacobowitz

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