Re: [PATCH] Notify observer of breakpoint auto-disabling

[Patrick Monnerat <patrick@monnerat.net>]

On 8/13/21 8:59 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2021-08-13 12:27 p.m., Patrick Monnerat wrote:
>> On 8/13/21 5:45 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>>> On 2021-08-13 11:31 a.m., Patrick Monnerat via Gdb-patches wrote:
>>>> As observer in currently notified of breakpoint stop before handling its
>>>> auto-disabling after count is reached, the observer is never notified of
>>>> the disabling.
>>>>
>>>> This patch moves the observer notification after the auto-disabling
>>>> code.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23336
>>>>
>>>> * gdb/breakpoint.c (bpstat_stop_status): move observer notification
>>>>     after auto-disabling code.
>>>> ---
>>>>    gdb/breakpoint.c | 2 +-
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/gdb/breakpoint.c b/gdb/breakpoint.c
>>>> index 89af44ee4c6..feca224ccf4 100644
>>>> --- a/gdb/breakpoint.c
>>>> +++ b/gdb/breakpoint.c
>>>> @@ -5491,7 +5491,6 @@ bpstat_stop_status (const address_space *aspace,
>>>>          if (bs->stop)
>>>>            {
>>>>              ++(b->hit_count);
>>>> -          gdb::observers::breakpoint_modified.notify (b);
>>>>                /* We will stop here.  */
>>>>              if (b->disposition == disp_disable)
>>>> @@ -5501,6 +5500,7 @@ bpstat_stop_status (const address_space *aspace,
>>>>                b->enable_state = bp_disabled;
>>>>              removed_any = 1;
>>>>            }
>>>> +          gdb::observers::breakpoint_modified.notify (b);
>>>>              if (b->silent)
>>>>            bs->print = 0;
>>>>              bs->commands = b->commands;
>>>>
>>> Is there some user-visible behavior change, that we could write a test for?
>> With gdb alone, I don't think so.
>>
>> This impacts insight: the breakpoint GUI window does not refllect the disabling.
>>
>> No possible workaround here, since the observer is never notified again after breakpoint has been disabled (unless some user action on the later).
>>
>> As this is a GUI behavior, I don't think we can write a gdb test in this context.
> Ok, thanks.  I think this information should be included in the commit
> message, as it justifies the need for the change.

I will re-post patch with commit message updated.

Patrick