This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: 'finish' command on ppc64
> It was discussed at:
> Re: [FYI] Inlining support, rough patch
> with some Fedora patch (later dropped) so that after `finish' GDB would
> _always_ stay at the caller line.
Interesting. I'm not sure I would agree if the jump was the last insn
of the line... Showing the caller's line in this case would be a
departure from the usual behavior of showing the next insn, no?
> Currently testcases expect both cases:
> # Some architectures will have one or more instructions after the
> # call instruction which still is part of the call sequence, so we
> # must be prepared for a "finish" to show us the void_func call
> # again as well as the statement after.
I think that's fine.