This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [4/4] RFC: implement catch load and catch unload
On 01/24/2012 05:07 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>> + ui_out_field_int (current_uiout, "spurious", 1);
>
> Pedro> Do we need "spurious"? We get the same info from neither
> Pedro> "removed" nor "added" being present. I'm not super fond of using
> Pedro> the word "spurious" because the stop had some reason, and in my
> Pedro> mind, something spurious is something that should not have
> Pedro> happened. But in this case, the stop means something, but we're
> Pedro> not interpreting it.
>
> I removed it. I also removed it from the ui_out_text call.
Thanks.
> Pedro> Maybe for "catch ...", we shouldn't report a stop in the
> Pedro> "spurious" case?
>
> We don't -- check_status_catch_solib will filter them out.
Ah, missed that. Great.
>>> + if (self->base.pspace != NULL && other->pspace != self->base.pspace)
>>> + continue;
>
> Pedro> So a consequence of this is that "catch load" is only active for
> Pedro> the inferior was current when the catchpoint was created, right?
> Pedro> Was that the intention? If we already had itsets, we could make
> Pedro> it trigger on all inferiors by default, and then use itsets to
> Pedro> filter.
>
> I just made it work the way other catchpoints seem to work. They are
> also pspace-specific. It seemed ok to do this, to me, on the theory
> that one more spot to change for itsets won't be a big burden; while on
> the other hand being different here doesn't seem beneficial.
Okay, that's reasonable.
--
Pedro Alves