This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [4/9] associate bpstat with location
On Saturday 08 September 2007 18:43:46 Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Saturday 08 September 2007 16:15:35 Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > > The reason why the assumption is valid is because the only way to have
> > > several bpstats refer to one breakpoint is when breakpoint has two
> > > locations, and both locations have the same address. That makes no sense --
> > > there's no per-location data that can make those locations different
> > > in behaviour, and so having two locations with same address would
> > > be a bug.
> >
> > If this can happen only as a result of a bug, perhaps a gdb_assert is
> > in order.
>
> Yes, except there's no convenient place where assert can be placed.
> To assert this assumption you have to actually walk though all bpstats
> and check for duplication locations, and that's too much work.
>
> > > > > case bp_access_watchpoint:
> > > > > if (bs->old_val != NULL)
> > > > > {
> > > > > - annotate_watchpoint (bs->breakpoint_at->number);
> > > > > + annotate_watchpoint (b->number);
> > > >
> > > > Watchpoints also? Did you make corresponding changes in the code that
> > > > sets watchpoints?
> > >
> > > No. This patch is not supposed to have any change in behaviour whatsoever,
> > > it merely moves a data member.
> >
> > Does that mean that the display of watchpoints for "info watch" will
> > be now different from "info break"?
>
> *This* patch does not change input of "info break". In fact, it does not change
> any observable behaviour.
>
> As for future patches, the basically have two output changes:
>
> 1. Printing of multiple locations, if any
> 2. Printing of "(p)"
>
> Neither of those output changes are applicable to watchpoints. (1) is not
> applicable because watchpoints can't have multiple locations, in the same
> way breakpoints do. (2) is not applicable because gdb will never try to
> set bp_shlib_disabled state for a watchpoint, neither in the current code, nor
> after my patches.
Eli,
are you happy with the explanations above?
- Volodya