This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: stepping over permanent breakpoint steps one instruction too much? (Re: diffgdbdaymail 20141029)
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: gdb-testers at sourceware dot org, "gdb at sourceware dot org" <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 10:59:55 +0000
- Subject: Re: stepping over permanent breakpoint steps one instruction too much? (Re: diffgdbdaymail 20141029)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <201410291149 dot s9TBnFmS031277 at host1 dot jankratochvil dot net> <545113C2 dot 8070304 at redhat dot com> <545772F4 dot 20801 at redhat dot com>
Hi,
Closing the loop here,
On 11/03/2014 12:20 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> #gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp
>>> Running gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp ...
>>> PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Stop at the 'standard' start breakpoint (fetching esp).
>>> PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Stop at permanent breakpoint.
>>> -PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Single stepping past permanent breakpoint.
>>> -PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: ESP value does not match - step_permanent_breakpoint wrong.
>>> +FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Single stepping past permanent breakpoint. (GDB internal error)
>>> +FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: ESP value does not match - step_permanent_breakpoint wrong.
>>
>> Mine. The test is skipped on 64-bit, and seems like I missed the case
>> of stepping permanent breakpoints.
...
> I would instead expect that a stepi at 0x0804848c stops at 0x0804848d,
> _before_ the "leave" is executed.
...
> I'm working on fixing GDB in the direction of stepi stopping before
> the "leave" is executed. Does anyone have a different opinion
> on how GDB should behave?
This is now fixed/done on mainline.
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-11/msg00075.html
Thanks,
Pedro Alves