Some ideas of displaced step function

[Michael Snyder]

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Friday 03 October 2008 01:31:54, Michael Snyder wrote:
> 
>> Why are we using displaced-stepping when we're not async?
> 
> s/async/non-stop mode/g.  All-stop + async doesn't need
> it either.  This feature was added for non-stop, as a way to
> avoid lifting breakpoints from the inferior when stepping over
> a breakpoint, otherwise, other running threads could miss them.
> 
> No other reason to have it always on other than for more
> exposure, I guess.  Time to pull the plug?
> 
> I'd still like to have a way to enable displaced-stepping
> in all-stop mode, as it's very useful for testing.

I certainly don't mind 'enable', but maybe it doesn't
need to always be enabled by default?