This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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: Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.

From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:32:35 +0000
Subject: Re: Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.
References: <200911190207.02432.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200911200030.50194.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20091120011305.GA9797@caradoc.them.org>

On Friday 20 November 2009 01:13:06, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> watchpoint while we're trying to stop it.  Is there any reason not to
> temporarily switch threads to check?  Or any reason to, for that
> matter - I'm not sure.

At least on linux, the other watchpoint hit will be left
pending, and so will be reported on the next resume,
so it doesn't seem worth it to bother much with that.

-- 
Pedro Alves

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

References:
- Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.
  - From: Pedro Alves
- Re: Don't delete local watchpoints just because a different thread stopped.
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

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