This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] traceframe_changed observer and MI notification
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 12:52:05 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] traceframe_changed observer and MI notification
- References: <1346404195-20864-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com>
>>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> writes:
Yao> Regression tested on x86_64-linux native and gdbserver. OK?
The idea seems fine to me.
Yao> +@item =traceframe-changed,num=@var{tfnum},tracepoint=@var{tpnum}
Yao> +@itemx =traceframe-changed,end
Yao> +Reports that the traceframe is changed and its number is @var{tfnum}.
Yao> +or @value{GDBN} stops examining traceframes and resumes live debugging.
Yao> +The number of the tracepoint associated with this traceframe is
Yao> +@var{tpnum}.
That should be a comma and not a period before "or".
Yao> +static void
Yao> +mi_traceframe_changed (int tfnum, int tpnum)
This function needs an introductory comment.
It can be brief.
Yao> + target_terminal_ours ();
Yao> +
Yao> + if (mi_suppress_notification.traceframe)
Yao> + return;
It seems to me that checking suppression first is probably better.
Tom