Re: [PATCH] Fix dprintf work not right if it is pending

[Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>]

On 03/22/2013 04:12 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> > But if the dprintf is pending.  When it reset by function bkpt_re_set,
> > there is not code to code to update extra_string to commands.
> > So I add this code to function update_breakpoint_locations.  The issue
> > is fixed.
>
> The bug was reported in PR breakpoints/15292: Pending dprintf don't
> work.
>
> We need a test case here, I think, to show pending dprintf doesn't
> work, and it works with your patch applied.
>
> I am wondering whether we need a new breakpoint_ops field
> "parse_extra_string", and use it like:
>
>     b->ops->parse_extra_string (b, extra_string);
>
> instead of duplicate the code.

I agree: special handling is necessary, but I don't care for either of 
these solutions. The original proposal clutters generic breakpoint code 
with dprintf-specific handling. As Yao correctly points out, this is 
what the breakpoint ops vector is for.

However, I don't like the idea of adding a new "parse_extra_string" 
method. It is far too vague. Parse extra_string when?

I think the better solution, and one which we already have the 
infrastructure for, is to define a dprintf_re_set method in the 
dprintf's breakpoint ops, updating the command list whenever a pending 
breakpoint is resolved.

This definitely needs a test.

Keith