From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>,
Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>,
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] Convert hardware watchpoints to use breakpoint_ops
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101116080721.GC4434@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101116040625.GB19243@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
> > -static void
> > -insert_catch_fork (struct breakpoint *b)
> > +static int
> > +insert_catch_fork (struct bp_location *b)
>
> Such variables (across the whole patch) should be really renamed when
> changing its type.
How about doing such a rename as a patch on its own? I've spent
a fair amount of time thinking about this patch, and I'd rather not
have to review it again if the changes are only going to be minor
and not affect behavior.
I don't have any issue with blocking checkin of this patch until patches
implementing your suggestions are approved, if that helps. I just
would rather avoid having to re-review the same patch again. Knowing
how git works, this shouldn't be very hard to do.
(notice: IIRC, when I first looked at patch #2, one of my reactions
is that I wanted to see the patch split-up in several smaller pieces;
I will explain that when I get to that patch)
> Also were these functions intended per-breakpoint or per-bp_location?
> It looks to me currently they are used only for single-location
> breakpoint so no one knows. (I guess they were meant for breakpoint.)
I think that eventually, we want them to be per bp-location. It does
not matter right now, as you say, since they are only used for single-
location breakpoints.
That's a good point, though. Perhaps a documentation update can help
make that clearer. OK with a separate patch?
> > - void (*insert) (struct breakpoint *);
> > + /* Insert the breakpoint or watchpoint or activate the catchpoint.
> > + Return 0 for success, 1 if the breakpoint, watchpoint or catchpoint
> > + type is not supported, -1 for failure. */
> > + int (*insert) (struct bp_location *);
[...]
> At least rename it to insert_bploc (or insert_location etc.). This
> will need to be cleaned up with the regular breakpoints/watchpoints
> conversion to breakpoint_ops.
I don't feel that strongly about it. I don't feel that renaming
"insert" that takes a bp_loc into "insert_bploc" is going to help
much. But I'm OK. I am suggesting that we push that as a followup
patch, if that's OK with you, just to ease review of that change
alone.
--
Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-16 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-17 19:41 Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-10-07 14:47 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-10-16 17:43 ` Pedro Alves
2010-10-20 0:31 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-11-04 21:17 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-11-08 18:43 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-11-08 21:39 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-11-15 22:23 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-11-16 19:03 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-11-18 17:18 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-11-19 20:10 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-12-23 19:06 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-01-11 19:31 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2011-04-29 15:51 ` "Cannot remove breakpoints because program is no longer writable" & catchpoints (was: Re: [patch 1/2] Convert hardware watchpoints to use breakpoint_ops) Pedro Alves
2010-11-16 4:06 ` [patch 1/2] Convert hardware watchpoints to use breakpoint_ops Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-16 8:07 ` Joel Brobecker [this message]
2010-11-16 18:51 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-17 3:47 ` [patch] Renaming: {insert,remove} += _location [Re: [patch 1/2] Convert hardware watchpoints to use breakpoint_ops] Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-18 17:13 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-11-17 3:47 ` [patch] renaming: bp_location: b->bl &co. " Jan Kratochvil
2010-11-18 17:15 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-12-23 18:50 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2010-12-24 5:14 ` Joel Brobecker
2010-12-27 20:04 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101116080721.GC4434@adacore.com \
--to=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=bauerman@br.ibm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).