Re: New breakpoint_re_set call vs remote targets

[Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>]

On Thursday 25 June 2009 00:46:34, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > Assuming the debugging session didn't blow up, wouldn't a
> > breakpoint_re_set call after loading fix this? ?The live
> > target has gotten new code loaded, so triggering
> > breakpoint re-evaluation and prologue skipping doesn't sound
> > wrong to me.
> 
> Yeah, that would probably do it. ?I think it's wacky that prologue
> skipping relies on target memory, though.
> 
> > It also occurs to me that for always-inserted mode, we'd probably
> > want to uninsert breakpoints before loading.
> 
> Uck.
> 

:-)  The way I tend to see it, is that a "load" is similar to
an execl, with the twist that a load may not replace the whole
address space --- I was going to mention mark_breakpoints_out
otherwise.

-- 
Pedro Alves