This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/testsuite] Cleanup pending breakpoints
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org ml" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:00:44 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFA/testsuite] Cleanup pending breakpoints
- References: <517716B5 dot 7050406 at redhat dot com> <5177EDAF dot 6030107 at redhat dot com> <517986D9 dot 3060607 at redhat dot com> <517ABD12 dot 9020506 at redhat dot com> <517ABE65 dot 1040809 at redhat dot com>
On 04/26/2013 06:50 PM, Keith Seitz wrote:
> On 04/26/2013 10:44 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> If in the end, there's no use in the tree for an "allow-pending"
>> option that allows pending but doesn't fail with a regular
>> non-pending breakpoint, in addition to a new "pending" option that
>> _requires_ pending, then I'd rather eliminate "allow-pending".
>
> Right, that's what I meant -- remove "allow-pending" and add "pending". I suggest for the immediate time, we/I introduce "pending" (i.e, fail if regular BP set), and then we/I can go back and take a look at all the users of allow-pending and ascertain whether they would work (or were supposed to work) if a normal breakpoint was set.
>
> From the dozen cases or two that I've already looked at (or written), all were really of the required type not optional type, i.e., the test was written specifically for a pending breakpoint; a regular breakpoint would break the test.
Sounds like a good plan to me.
Thanks,
--
Pedro Alves