From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15224 invoked by alias); 26 May 2016 17:00:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15100 invoked by uid 89); 26 May 2016 17:00:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 26 May 2016 17:00:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9EA63D1EC; Thu, 26 May 2016 17:00:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4QH048n002305; Thu, 26 May 2016 13:00:05 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] Use reinsert_breakpoint for vCont;s To: Yao Qi References: <1463757161-25850-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1463757161-25850-8-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1fe2e4c5-88c5-e7ec-4d8c-4ba6849ab7ba@redhat.com> <868tyw4v8k.fsf@gmail.com> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <1db9a412-0ef3-0614-d405-66302c41103c@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <868tyw4v8k.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00461.txt.bz2 On 05/26/2016 05:52 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > Pedro Alves writes: > >>> + /* Remove reinsert breakpoints for resume_step. */ >>> + if (can_software_single_step () >>> + && current_thread->last_resume_kind == resume_step >> >> What if a vCont;t came in after the step had started and >> before it finished? Won't we have lost the resume_step >> linux_set_resume_request then? > > Do you mean a case like this? GDB sends vCont;s, and then GDBserver > started step-over, in the middle of step-over, GDB sends vCont;t, so > thread->last_resume_kind is set from resume_step to resume_stop, and the > check here fails, so reinsert breakpoints are not deleted. Exactly. Thanks, Pedro Alves