Re: stepping over permanent breakpoint steps one instruction too much? (Re: diffgdbdaymail 20141029)

Pedro Alves <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel,gmane.comp.gdb.testing
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

Closing the loop here,

On 11/03/2014 12:20 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:

>>> #gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp
>>>  Running gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp ...
>>>  PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Stop at the 'standard' start breakpoint (fetching esp).
>>>  PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Stop at permanent breakpoint.
>>> -PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Single stepping past permanent breakpoint.
>>> -PASS: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: ESP value does not match - step_permanent_breakpoint wrong.
>>> +FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: Single stepping past permanent breakpoint. (GDB internal error)
>>> +FAIL: gdb.arch/i386-bp_permanent.exp: ESP value does not match - step_permanent_breakpoint wrong.
>>
>> Mine.  The test is skipped on 64-bit, and seems like I missed the case
>> of stepping permanent breakpoints.

...

> I would instead expect that a stepi at 0x0804848c stops at 0x0804848d,
> _before_ the "leave" is executed.

...

> I'm working on fixing GDB in the direction of stepi stopping before
> the "leave" is executed.  Does anyone have a different opinion
> on how GDB should behave?

This is now fixed/done on mainline.

https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-11/msg00075.html

Thanks,
Pedro Alves
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.