From: Yao Qi Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 10:38:28 +0000 (+0100) Subject: Re-indent the code X-Git-Url: https://git.libre-soc.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=8ee525679d030cd2c35eaee3b8d4ac545c5dc8ee;p=binutils-gdb.git Re-indent the code gdb/gdbserver: 2015-08-25 Yao Qi * linux-aarch64-low.c (debug_reg_change_callback): Re-indent the code. --- diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog b/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog index 64ea217b9be..d5eb882fbf4 100644 --- a/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2015-08-25 Yao Qi + + * linux-aarch64-low.c (debug_reg_change_callback): Re-indent + the code. + 2015-08-25 Yao Qi * linux-aarch64-low.c (aarch64_dr_update_callback_param) : diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c index d39a54fdb9c..8b59eab6228 100644 --- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.c @@ -272,39 +272,39 @@ debug_reg_change_callback (struct lwp_info *lwp, void *ptr) : &info->dr_changed_bp; dr_changed = *dr_changed_ptr; - gdb_assert (idx >= 0 - && (idx <= (is_watchpoint ? aarch64_num_wp_regs - : aarch64_num_bp_regs))); - - /* The following assertion is not right, as there can be changes - that have not been made to the hardware debug registers - before new changes overwrite the old ones. This can happen, - for instance, when the breakpoint/watchpoint hit one of the - threads and the user enters continue; then what happens is: - 1) all breakpoints/watchpoints are removed for all threads; - 2) a single step is carried out for the thread that was hit; - 3) all of the points are inserted again for all threads; - 4) all threads are resumed. - The 2nd step will only affect the one thread in which the - bp/wp was hit, which means only that one thread is resumed; - remember that the actual updating only happen in - aarch64_linux_prepare_to_resume, so other threads remain - stopped during the removal and insertion of bp/wp. Therefore - for those threads, the change of insertion of the bp/wp - overwrites that of the earlier removals. (The situation may - be different when bp/wp is steppable, or in the non-stop - mode.) */ - /* gdb_assert (DR_N_HAS_CHANGED (dr_changed, idx) == 0); */ - - /* The actual update is done later just before resuming the lwp, - we just mark that one register pair needs updating. */ - DR_MARK_N_CHANGED (dr_changed, idx); - *dr_changed_ptr = dr_changed; - - /* If the lwp isn't stopped, force it to momentarily pause, so - we can update its debug registers. */ - if (!lwp->stopped) - linux_stop_lwp (lwp); + gdb_assert (idx >= 0 + && (idx <= (is_watchpoint ? aarch64_num_wp_regs + : aarch64_num_bp_regs))); + + /* The following assertion is not right, as there can be changes + that have not been made to the hardware debug registers + before new changes overwrite the old ones. This can happen, + for instance, when the breakpoint/watchpoint hit one of the + threads and the user enters continue; then what happens is: + 1) all breakpoints/watchpoints are removed for all threads; + 2) a single step is carried out for the thread that was hit; + 3) all of the points are inserted again for all threads; + 4) all threads are resumed. + The 2nd step will only affect the one thread in which the + bp/wp was hit, which means only that one thread is resumed; + remember that the actual updating only happen in + aarch64_linux_prepare_to_resume, so other threads remain + stopped during the removal and insertion of bp/wp. Therefore + for those threads, the change of insertion of the bp/wp + overwrites that of the earlier removals. (The situation may + be different when bp/wp is steppable, or in the non-stop + mode.) */ + /* gdb_assert (DR_N_HAS_CHANGED (dr_changed, idx) == 0); */ + + /* The actual update is done later just before resuming the lwp, + we just mark that one register pair needs updating. */ + DR_MARK_N_CHANGED (dr_changed, idx); + *dr_changed_ptr = dr_changed; + + /* If the lwp isn't stopped, force it to momentarily pause, so + we can update its debug registers. */ + if (!lwp->stopped) + linux_stop_lwp (lwp); if (show_debug_regs) {