Save the length of inserted breakpoints

Daniel Jacobowitz drow@false.org
Wed Apr 12 12:57:00 GMT 2006


On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 11:43:34AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> I'm very sorry Daniel, but I think this is a bad idea.  Passing down
> struct bp_location makes the interface between the low-level tdep code
> and the high-level breakpoint code much less clear.  The low-level
> code really should not know about the details of the breakpoint
> implementation because people will be tempted to abuse it.  And
> changing the breakpoint interface will become a pain because suddenly
> we will need to change all targets as well.

Do you have a suggestion, then?  I need some guidance; I've tried
several versions of this patch and you haven't liked them.

Would a new "struct bp_target_info", defined and allocated centrally
for convenience, allay this concern?  [Conveniently I can do the bulk
of the changes for that with sed :-)]

I'd prefer to define and allocate it centrally, rather than completely
per-target, since the requirements of targets seem to be so similar.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery



More information about the Gdb-patches mailing list