Update comments to start_step_over
Commit Message
I happen to see that comments to start_step_over isn't in sync with
code, so this patch is to update the comments.
gdb/gdbserver:
2016-02-29 Yao Qi <yao.qi@linaro.org>
* linux-low.c: Update comments to start_step_over.
---
gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c | 16 ++++------------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Comments
Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com> writes:
> I happen to see that comments to start_step_over isn't in sync with
> code, so this patch is to update the comments.
>
> gdb/gdbserver:
>
> 2016-02-29 Yao Qi <yao.qi@linaro.org>
>
> * linux-low.c: Update comments to start_step_over.
I pushed it in.
@@ -4629,18 +4629,10 @@ need_step_over_p (struct inferior_list_entry *entry, void *dummy)
of the way. If we let other threads run while we do that, they may
pass by the breakpoint location and miss hitting it. To avoid
that, a step-over momentarily stops all threads while LWP is
- single-stepped while the breakpoint is temporarily uninserted from
- the inferior. When the single-step finishes, we reinsert the
- breakpoint, and let all threads that are supposed to be running,
- run again.
-
- On targets that don't support hardware single-step, we don't
- currently support full software single-stepping. Instead, we only
- support stepping over the thread event breakpoint, by asking the
- low target where to place a reinsert breakpoint. Since this
- routine assumes the breakpoint being stepped over is a thread event
- breakpoint, it usually assumes the return address of the current
- function is a good enough place to set the reinsert breakpoint. */
+ single-stepped by either hardware or software while the breakpoint
+ is temporarily uninserted from the inferior. When the single-step
+ finishes, we reinsert the breakpoint, and let all threads that are
+ supposed to be running, run again. */
static int
start_step_over (struct lwp_info *lwp)