[PATCH] Fix for follow-fork: followed child doesn't stop
Luis Machado
lgustavo@codesourcery.com
Fri Jun 6 12:27:00 GMT 2014
Hi Don,
On 06/05/2014 10:44 PM, Breazeal, Don wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> Thanks for the review.
>
>>> + if (tp->control.step_resume_breakpoint != NULL)
>>> + tp->control.step_resume_breakpoint->loc->inserted = 0;
>>
>> Maybe add a little more context as to why this conditional is doing what
>> it is doing? I imagine someone scratching their head to figure this out.
>> Your description above makes good sense.
>
> I added a comment above the conditional. Let me know if it isn't what
> you had in mind.
>
That looks good to me. Thanks.
--snip--
> - if [runto_main] then { explicit_fork_parent_follow }
> + # The first two tests should be sufficient to test the defaults.
> + # There is no need to test using the defaults in other permutations
> + # (e.g. "default" "on", "parent" "default", etc.).
> + set cases [list [list "default" "default" "next 2"] \
> + [list "default" "default" "continue"] \
> + [list "parent" "on" "next 2"] \
> + [list "parent" "on" "continue"] \
> + [list "child" "on" "next 2"] \
> + [list "child" "on" "continue"] \
> + [list "parent" "off" "next 2"] \
> + [list "parent" "off" "continue"] \
> + [list "child" "off" "next 2"] \
> + [list "child" "off" "continue"]]
> + foreach args $cases {
> + test_follow_fork [lindex $args 0] [lindex $args 1] [lindex $args 2]
> + }
>
I had suggested what Pedro did, but my mail server wasn't too happy with
sending my mails out.
Luis
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list