Re: [patch/rfc] Disable [eE] packets by default

[Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>]

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> > Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> This is a followup to the current discussion regarding the [Ee] packets.
> >> It disables them by default.
> >>
> >> While it is a brutal solution to a problem, it is also 6 days before 5.2
> >> branches.  It also clears the slate for another attempt at this.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > I think this is the right thing to do.  Previously we had
> > no way to test the 'e' packet.  Now that we do have, it is
> > seen to be buggy.  This is like an unreliable optimization.
> > You can give the user the opportunity to use it if he chooses,
> > but you don't turn it on by default.
> 
> It is in.  We're now free to figure out how to really make this work :-)
> 
> > I would like to start discussing the right way to implement this.
> > For one thing, the current implementation has remote.c snatching
> > control away from infrun, and doing something completely
> > different from what infrun asked it to do.  I'd like to have
> > the decision about whether to use step-over-range made in
> > infrun, not in the target layer.
> 
> Yes, definitly.  I suspect step-out-of-range is a special case of step.
>   I think the decision to try to use both should be made by infrun.c.

I'm picturing a "to_step_over_range" target vector, and the decision
about whether or not to use it would be made in infrun/resume, 
right about the same place where it decides whether to use step or
continue.