From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD2973858D32 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2023 10:30:38 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DD2973858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1688985038; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=uF6oLHvzak+iUZ3+RqbJL3a2rmtTGML5OxREmoEYWAc=; b=Lf9uYJZyREAFHSJDqUm2vxzjtglpI5GGwDtaZjgd+wPTZhkZUT4/ul8wTvJJr14RwW5/Pt y/KhBloQ7NLQ7gFc7E6sg7QhH+y0Li9vZSs1tbcHlsUS8W9unqxWFzMmBTjVeu9WZusDes +iIVBq1dPV58uBVvKkLIhK75iSooffU= Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-475-bCSXLuW7NcqF9-NMsrg9lQ-1; Mon, 10 Jul 2023 06:30:37 -0400 X-MC-Unique: bCSXLuW7NcqF9-NMsrg9lQ-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-315935c808bso609876f8f.1 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2023 03:30:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1688985036; x=1691577036; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uF6oLHvzak+iUZ3+RqbJL3a2rmtTGML5OxREmoEYWAc=; b=jByiLkidSn6b5euhB9oAQ99RR+9Wkbn7JJJuJ5Ir4GARwIwZKizVQP9aks1Yjg0StT 8V+q+jd6MCVo35Kk7W0kNHFcm5JSp5tWUc/9QpGhrw92ZcAlTvYAtZYzXW7TKo/9ZZ81 56OhXfTFLGTp6K1f7U4J7W0zFOgnTnfZCCMUHGIcEHaVg1XxW2puxe7+F6BJyIyueo8U 4BmhqT9wfUQs9LJhdk/F9dVjlT4NLJCLIQ6EDuYKXRoS2eGQil5qs8wVI7WMT3uQxTqn YHApZZvHwXiwZJS5MxFTMiQc14xM6cYrXc9CVXYMISPUMCHYSJaBRCUi7blOcFvdnfrF l3Uw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABy/qLYRtN5DUPDtrDZK+HQWnLNSaaM1ZTAl0v5txg9kJQAyJYpKEnFN UgLVi0zqjHBxZH2JY4bMMFsc3rZH040w9NmqgHRMZas9G+bKDZDS5u5cjryBuO0Euf1milQcafx tj/wvlXDvgc1h+rqjwM7dfdqn0JXssg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:590f:0:b0:313:ed10:7f52 with SMTP id v15-20020a5d590f000000b00313ed107f52mr14685723wrd.18.1688985035896; Mon, 10 Jul 2023 03:30:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APBJJlFHIU39ln5Y+FFskZQWgLHKo0M7D9cbA7PJHwR0kAjZL1wQK3MKfSsuF4oDDRleN2HBvRegcw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:590f:0:b0:313:ed10:7f52 with SMTP id v15-20020a5d590f000000b00313ed107f52mr14685709wrd.18.1688985035621; Mon, 10 Jul 2023 03:30:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (2.72.115.87.dyn.plus.net. [87.115.72.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o2-20020a5d4742000000b0031434936f0dsm11309552wrs.68.2023.07.10.03.30.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Jul 2023 03:30:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Burgess To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 01/11] gdb: include breakpoint number in testing condition error message In-Reply-To: <35169d2a-bd73-d1cc-c0a8-3e8b85618292@palves.net> References: <24b51a1fbfc6f8b8cc52e3f90d4f36c1d44aaa6b.1678987897.git.aburgess@redhat.com> <3012ae0b-ac62-1b19-e56a-00129205393b@palves.net> <87sf9zk9rs.fsf@redhat.com> <35169d2a-bd73-d1cc-c0a8-3e8b85618292@palves.net> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2023 11:30:33 +0100 Message-ID: <87h6qcjbxy.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Pedro Alves writes: > On 2023-07-07 16:43, Andrew Burgess wrote: >> Pedro Alves writes: > >>> Reading this, I was thinking that we should print the breakpoint location number >>> as well. We do print it when presenting breakpoint stops nowadays, like: >>> >>> (top-gdb) b printf >>> Breakpoint 3 at 0xee680 (2 locations) >>> (top-gdb) r >>> ... >>> Breakpoint 3.1, ui_file::printf ... >>> ... >>> >>> Did you consider that and decided against? I didn't find any mention of it in previous >>> discussions. >> >> No, this was just an oversight, and would I think be a great >> improvement. >> >> The patch below implements this idea. Let me know what you think. > > Looks good, thanks! > > Approved-By: Pedro Alves Pushed. Thanks, Andrew