This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: proposed PATCH: make watchpoints work correctly
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: pkoning at equallogic dot com
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 07:20:25 +0300
- Subject: Re: proposed PATCH: make watchpoints work correctly
- References: <16084.56661.295275.544414@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> <1659-Wed28May2003225524+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <16085.7093.776115.863795@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com> <5567-Thu29May2003062838+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <16086.9378.401730.788367@pkoning.dev.equallogic.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 11:17:54 -0400
> From: Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>
>
> Eli> Certainly, I understand that. I just was surprised that your
> Eli> description of the problem was so different from my recollection
> Eli> of how watchpoints work.
>
> I just ran a small test case on the x86 Linux native build of gdb 5.3,
> and the problem (step works as if it were stepi, falsely reported as a
> watchpoint hit) occurs there as well -- just as expected.
Thanks, I now see the problem.
I think your solution is correct, but I'd like to minimize the number
of calls to target_stopped_data_address (they might be expensive).
Since the code already does call that function that elsewhere, could
we just reuse the result of that call, or rearrange your patch so that
a single call would do?
Otherwise, I think your change should go in. Thanks.