Re: [PATCH v2 15/23] Implement all-stop on top of a target running non-stop mode

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 04/08/2015 10:34 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> @@ -1997,7 +1998,7 @@ start_step_over_inferior (struct inferior *inf)
>>  	{
>>  	  /* In all-stop, we shouldn't have resumed unless we needed a
>>  	     step over.  */
>> -	  gdb_assert (non_stop);
>> +	  gdb_assert (target_is_non_stop_p ());
>>  	}
>>      }
> 
> Hi Pedro,
> I tested the whole series on arm-linux and there is an assert triggered
> with gdbserver,
> 
> signal SIGTRAP^M
> Continuing with signal SIGTRAP.^M
> ../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/infrun.c:2008: internal-error: start_step_over_inferior: Assertion `target_is_non_stop_p ()' failed.^M
> A problem internal to GDB has been detected,^M
> further debugging may prove unreliable.^M
> Quit this debugging session? (y or n) FAIL: gdb.threads/signal-sigtrap.exp: sigtrap thread 2: signal SIGTRAP reaches handler (GDB internal error)
> 
> there is no such internal error in native testing.  I haven't analyse it
> carefully yet.

Interesting.  I hadn't tested gdbserver with the series applied on
top of my x86-64 software single-step branch.  But running signal-sigtrap.exp
against that trips on that assert too.  The test does passes cleanly against
gdbserver with hardware single-step (x86-64).  I'll take a look.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves