This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: schedlock.exp questions


Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

No. The request was "single-step this thread, but allow other threads to run while you do it". Other threads might report a breakpoint (not possible in this testcase), but they shouldn't report a single-step trap - they shouldn't singlestep.

Thanks for clarifying. Would you mind explaining the "not possible in this testcase" part? I do get spurious SIGTRAPs for the other threads from the "break 41 if arg != 5" breakpoint, reported as SIGTRAP (instead of as breakpoint hits).


Strangely enough, for the CRIS target (the above refers to CRISv32) I
*also* get breakpoint hits from "break 41 if arg != 5" for the other threads also (noticed by inspecting the remote communication), but these are ignored by GDB (neither displayed as breakpoint hits, nor as SIGTRAPs).


This is all when stepping without a lock, BTW.

Any insight as to what's going on is greatly appreciated.

--
Orjan Friberg
Axis Communications


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]