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] |
Even the 16 makes no sense! If you pull the code though, solaris (from memory) gets really bad test results ....Which reminds me - does that use of INNER_THAN make even the slightest sense on stack-grows-up architectures? I don't think it does.
It will be an ``||'' and not an &&. Hence, while making it longer, it is at least simple to read and makes reasonable sense (unlike the other bits). My other suggestion was to add a new parameter ``trap_type'' but that I think can wait for later.would be changed to read:
(trap_was_a_software_singlestep
|| ....)
Hmm, looking at the above, on an architecture like the i386, the test ``prev_pc != stop_pc - DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK'' is probably false when if the code has just stepped off a single byte instruction :-(
Is there some way we can do this without growing that condition? It's awful, and it makes very little sense; it feels like something that should already have been handled.
Yes, I'm trying to trick Joel into doing some of the DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK cleanups that everyone keeps meaning to do. It's just not being handled somewhere useful right now.
Shh, .... Andrew
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |