This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.org 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]

Re: 'finish' command on ppc64


> It was discussed at:
> 	Re: [FYI] Inlining support, rough patch
> 	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00786.html
> 
> 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:
> gdb.base/finish.exp
>     # 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.

-- 
Joel


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]