This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole.
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: uweigand at de dot ibm dot com
- Cc: drow at false dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:16:43 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [patch] "single step" atomic instruction sequences as a whole.
- References: <200704122009.l3CK9Agl030348@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 22:09:10 +0200 (CEST)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
>
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 07:16:14PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > I would think the "write_pc (next_pc)" statement in the
> > > !insert_breakpoints_p case should be unnecessary. This should
> > > already have been taken care of by infrun, shouldn't it?
> >
> > I'm afraid I don't know what this is for. You're probably correct,
> > though.
>
> I'd say we should remove it. The use of the contents of the
> static variable next_pc from a previous invocation strikes me
> as suspect anyway -- what if we're in another thread now?
I suspect the write_pc call is there to make stepping delay-slot
instructions work.
> I don't have a way to test on alpha-linux unfortunately. Do you?
I can test OpenBSD/alpha later this week if necessary.