From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7823 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2010 19:38:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 7812 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Sep 2010 19:38:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: Tom Tromey X-Fcc: ~/Mail/utrace Cc: Oleg Nesterov , utrace-devel@redhat.com, "Frank Ch. Eigler" , archer@sourceware.org Subject: Re: ugdb && breakpoints In-Reply-To: Tom Tromey's message of Friday, 10 September 2010 16:12:12 -0600 References: <20100908191838.GA27120@redhat.com> <20100910220007.GA6587@redhat.com> Message-Id: <20100914193804.99980403E8@magilla.sf.frob.com> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:38:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2010-q3/txt/msg00190.txt.bz2 The traditional method is to restore the original instruction replaced by the breakpoint in text, single-step over that instruction, then restore the breakpoint in text, then continue. That method requires all-stop so that while you are stepping the thread that just hit the breakpoint, you can't have another thread run past that instruction and miss the breakpoint. Both this traditional in-place method, and the instruction-copying method, depend on using single-step. So "stepi" has to work before "break" can work. Thanks, Roland