This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [mi] watchpoint-scope exec async command
> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:33:07 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: GDB <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
>
> No, we're crashing earlier than that. This was in one of Bob's earlier
> messages; we crash here:
>
> 1021 if (bpt->owner->related_breakpoint)
> 1022 bpt->owner->related_breakpoint->disposition = disp_del_at_next_stop;
> 1023 bpt->owner->disposition = disp_del_at_next_stop;
Right.
> > If we don't arrange a scope breakpoint for a hardware watchpoint, we
> > won't hit the problem Bob reported.
>
> I think this would be pretty tricky. We would have to recognize that
> if the next thing to trigger is the watchpoint, it doesn't "count".
Sorry, I'm not following. What I meant was this: when we _create_ the
watchpoint, if it's a hardware-assisted watchpoint, we should simply
not arrange a scope breakpoint for it. How is that tricky, and why
would we need to know that the next thing to trigger is the
watchpoint?
> The second seems marginally cleaner to me.
I wouldn't mind the second alternative too much.
> Even better would be deleting the software watchpoint at the same
> time
How is this different from what I said? I said:
> The second alternative is to treat scope breakpoints specially in
> breakpoint_auto_delete: when we see a scope breakpoint that is marked
> for deletion, we will have to find its watchpoint, and if that
> watchpoint is a hardware watchpoint, we will have to delete that
> watchpoint as well.