Re: [PATCH] Fix for follow-fork: followed child doesn't stop

[Luis Machado <lgustavo@codesourcery.com>]

Hi Don,

On 06/05/2014 10:44 PM, Breazeal, Don wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> Thanks for the review.
>
>>> +		    if (tp->control.step_resume_breakpoint != NULL)
>>> +		      tp->control.step_resume_breakpoint->loc->inserted = 0;
>>
>> Maybe add a little more context as to why this conditional is doing what
>> it is doing? I imagine someone scratching their head to figure this out.
>> Your description above makes good sense.
>
> I added a comment above the conditional.  Let me know if it isn't what
> you had in mind.
>

That looks good to me. Thanks.

--snip--
> -    if [runto_main] then { explicit_fork_parent_follow }
> +    # The first two tests should be sufficient to test the defaults.
> +    # There is no need to test using the defaults in other permutations
> +    # (e.g. "default" "on", "parent" "default", etc.).
> +    set cases [list [list "default" "default" "next 2"]   \
> +                    [list "default" "default" "continue"] \
> +                    [list "parent"  "on"      "next 2"]   \
> +                    [list "parent"  "on"      "continue"] \
> +                    [list "child"   "on"      "next 2"]   \
> +                    [list "child"   "on"      "continue"] \
> +                    [list "parent"  "off"     "next 2"]   \
> +                    [list "parent"  "off"     "continue"] \
> +                    [list "child"   "off"     "next 2"]   \
> +                    [list "child"   "off"     "continue"]]
> +    foreach args $cases {
> +        test_follow_fork [lindex $args 0] [lindex $args 1] [lindex $args 2]
> +    }
>

I had suggested what Pedro did, but my mail server wasn't too happy with 
sending my mails out.

Luis