From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24790 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2011 14:56:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 24776 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Dec 2011 14:56:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SINGLE_HEADER_1K,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:56:35 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB8EuYb5027915 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:56:34 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pB8EuXwH006241; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:56:34 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pB8EuWCe031460; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:56:32 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Kevin Pouget Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Python Finish Breakpoints References: Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:30:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Kevin Pouget's message of "Wed, 7 Dec 2011 11:06:47 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-12/txt/msg00266.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Pouget writes: Kevin> and we're .... not ready! Kevin> there are some regressions this morning, certainly due to your Kevin> ambiguous linespec patch! Kevin> first one is quite obvious: Kevin> a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.python/py-finish-breakpoint.exp Kevin> -if ![runto "getpid"] then { Kevin> - fail "Cannot run to getpid." Kevin> +if ![runto_main] then { Kevin> + fail "Cannot run to main." return 0 } Kevin> +gdb_breakpoint "getpid" {temporary} Kevin> +gdb_test "continue" "Temporary breakpoint .*in getpid.*" "continue to getpid" Kevin> + Kevin> "break getpid" used to work before actually starting the inferior, but Kevin> now it's unresolved This test assumes that there is no debuginfo for getpid -- but in my case, I have glibc debuginfo installed. This isn't unheard of for gdb developers :) The test would be more robust if you put a new function in a new file and arranged for that file to be compiled without debuginfo. Sorry I didn't notice this before. Kevin> bpfinishpy_out_of_scope can't be triggered anymore because you set Kevin> b-> pspace to NULL. I hesitated about how to fix it, but I think that Kevin> FinishBP have to be bound to the pspace in which they were set, so I Kevin> added this line: It seems to me that one of these breakpoints has to be thread-specific as well. Maybe the code to set b->pspace should notice thread-specific breakpoints and allow pspace to be set there. I'd rather this be done in breakpoint.c than have other modules modify struct breakpoint directly. Tom