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] |
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:15, Marc Khouzam<marc.khouzam@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi, > > while looking into the query stuff we have been discussing I ran into > the weird behavior where PRecord sets memory even if I answer 'n' to the > query. ?I've done a little troubleshooting and it seems that the query > code is not the problem. ?So, I thought that maybe even though PRecord > returns > from its method right away when I say 'n' to the query, the memory > has already been changed. ?Could that be? ?I didn't investigate further. > > Also, I didn't try it with changing registers. > > I'm pretty sure it used to work properly. > > Thanks > > Marc > > Here is the session: > > GNU gdb (GDB) 6.8.50.20090720-cvs > Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later > <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> > This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. > There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. ?Type "show > copying" > and "show warranty" for details. > This GDB was configured as "i686-pc-linux-gnu". > For bug reporting instructions, please see: > <http://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/>... > (gdb) l > 1 ? ? ? int main() { > 2 ? ? ? ? ? int a = 1; > 3 ? ? ? ? ? int b = 10; > 4 > 5 ? ? ? ? ? a++; > 6 ? ? ? ? ? b++; > 7 > 8 ? ? ? ? ? return a; > 9 ? ? ? } > 10 > (gdb) start > Temporary breakpoint 1 at 0x80483f5: file b.cc, line 2. > Starting program: /home/marc/testing/a.out > re > Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at b.cc:2 > 2 ? ? ? ? ? int a = 1; > (gdb) record > (gdb) n > 3 ? ? ? ? ? int b = 10; > (gdb) n > 5 ? ? ? ? ? a++; > (gdb) n > 6 ? ? ? ? ? b++; > (gdb) n > 8 ? ? ? ? ? return a; > (gdb) rn > 6 ? ? ? ? ? b++; > (gdb) p a > $1 = 2 > (gdb) set var a = 8 > Because GDB is in replay mode, writing to memory will make the execution > log unusable from this point onward. ?Write memory at address > 0xbffff6b0?(y or [n]) n > (gdb) p a > $2 = 8 > (gdb) > > Thanks Marc. This issue is because when user answer n, function record_xfer_partial return -1 will not really cancel the memory change operation. I make a patch to change it to error. And I have check the code about register, it works OK. Because it already use error. Please help me review it. Thanks, Hui 2009-07-21 Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> * record.c (record_xfer_partial): Call error When nquery return "n". --- record.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/record.c +++ b/record.c @@ -997,7 +997,7 @@ record_xfer_partial (struct target_ops * "will make the execution log unusable from this " "point onward. Write memory at address %s?"), paddress (target_gdbarch, offset))) - return -1; + error (_("Process record canceled the operation.")); /* Destroy the record from here forward. */ record_list_release_next ();
Attachment:
reverse-fix-change-memory.txt
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |