This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Submit process record and replay fourth time, 5/8
- From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Cc: Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>, Marc Khouzam <marc dot khouzam at ericsson dot com>, Michael Snyder <msnyder at vmware dot com>, Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman at br dot ibm dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, paawan1982 at yahoo dot com, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:32:48 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Submit process record and replay fourth time, 5/8
- References: <daef60380903210902v31f4afe4o96678e89b1d16710@mail.gmail.com> <daef60380903250021ge06043ei27e89a46239ef8a7@mail.gmail.com> <daef60380904151004g50e8aa89o143028b543ba2577@mail.gmail.com>
On Wednesday 15 April 2009 18:04:48, Hui Zhu wrote:
>
> /* Clean out any stray displaced stepping state. */
> @@ -2130,6 +2132,10 @@ adjust_pc_after_break (struct execution_
> if (software_breakpoint_inserted_here_p (breakpoint_pc)
> || (non_stop && moribund_breakpoint_here_p (breakpoint_pc)))
> {
> + struct cleanup *old_cleanups = NULL;
> + if (RECORD_IS_USED)
> + old_cleanups = record_gdb_operation_disable_set ();
> +
> /* When using hardware single-step, a SIGTRAP is reported for both
> a completed single-step and a software breakpoint. Need to
> differentiate between the two, as the latter needs adjusting
> @@ -2153,6 +2159,9 @@ adjust_pc_after_break (struct execution_
> || !currently_stepping (ecs->event_thread)
> || ecs->event_thread->prev_pc == breakpoint_pc)
> regcache_write_pc (regcache, breakpoint_pc);
> +
> + if (old_cleanups)
> + do_cleanups (old_cleanups);
> }
> }
Is this in the last version? This still has the problem with the
NULL cleanup I've just explained.
--
Pedro Alves