From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:18:29 +0000 (+0100)
Subject: Decide whether we may have removed breakpoints based on step_over_info
X-Git-Url: https://git.libre-soc.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6cc83d2a4000e89e4f6f2eb33ffade2d72acfa0f;p=binutils-gdb.git

Decide whether we may have removed breakpoints based on step_over_info

... instead of trap_expected.

Gets rid of one singlestep_breakpoints_inserted_p reference, and is
generally more to the point.

gdb/
2014-10-15  Pedro Alves  <palves@redhat.com>

	* infrun.c (step_over_info_valid_p): New function.
	(resume): Use step_over_info_valid_p instead of checking the
	threads's trap_expected flag.
---

diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog
index 47a4d42b860..5de56818f10 100644
--- a/gdb/ChangeLog
+++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2014-10-15  Pedro Alves  <palves@redhat.com>
+
+	* infrun.c (step_over_info_valid_p): New function.
+	(resume): Use step_over_info_valid_p instead of checking the
+	threads's trap_expected flag.
+
 2014-10-15  Doug Evans  <dje@google.com>
 	    Walfred Tedeschi  <walfred.tedeschi@intel.com>
 
diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c
index 613227463a1..650d71122d2 100644
--- a/gdb/infrun.c
+++ b/gdb/infrun.c
@@ -1278,6 +1278,14 @@ stepping_past_instruction_at (struct address_space *aspace,
 				       step_over_info.address));
 }
 
+/* Returns true if step-over info is valid.  */
+
+static int
+step_over_info_valid_p (void)
+{
+  return (step_over_info.aspace != NULL);
+}
+
 
 /* Displaced stepping.  */
 
@@ -2143,7 +2151,8 @@ a command like `return' or `jump' to continue execution."));
      once we arrive back at the step-resume breakpoint, actually step
      over the breakpoint we originally wanted to step over.  */
   if (singlestep_breakpoints_inserted_p
-      && tp->control.trap_expected && sig != GDB_SIGNAL_0)
+      && sig != GDB_SIGNAL_0
+      && step_over_info_valid_p ())
     {
       /* If we have nested signals or a pending signal is delivered
 	 immediately after a handler returns, might might already have
@@ -2237,13 +2246,10 @@ a command like `return' or `jump' to continue execution."));
   tp->suspend.stop_signal = GDB_SIGNAL_0;
 
   /* Advise target which signals may be handled silently.  If we have
-     removed breakpoints because we are stepping over one (which can
-     happen only if we are not using displaced stepping), we need to
-     receive all signals to avoid accidentally skipping a breakpoint
-     during execution of a signal handler.  */
-  if ((step || singlestep_breakpoints_inserted_p)
-      && tp->control.trap_expected
-      && !use_displaced_stepping (gdbarch))
+     removed breakpoints because we are stepping over one (in any
+     thread), we need to receive all signals to avoid accidentally
+     skipping a breakpoint during execution of a signal handler.  */
+  if (step_over_info_valid_p ())
     target_pass_signals (0, NULL);
   else
     target_pass_signals ((int) GDB_SIGNAL_LAST, signal_pass);