From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-16569-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 5435 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2002 19:18:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 5417 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2002 19:18:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (205.180.83.107)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Jun 2002 19:18:24 -0000
Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (IDENT:Ljn5nKjRbzitMK7o8tFvXZ5YG+8kMDDU@romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5RJJgQ26501;
	Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:19:42 -0700
Received: (from kev@localhost)
	by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g5RJIAX21703;
	Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:18:10 -0700
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 12:18:00 -0000
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1020627191809.ZM21702@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: Andrew Volkov <Andrew.Volkov@transas.com>
        "RE: [RFA/RFC] blockframe.c Fix errorneous addr check" (Jun 27, 10:58pm)
References: <2E74F312D6980D459F3A05492BA40F8DFE33B0@clue.transas.com>
To: Andrew Volkov <Andrew.Volkov@transas.com>,
   Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC] blockframe.c Fix errorneous addr check
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, jimb@redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00563.txt.bz2

On Jun 27, 10:58pm, Andrew Volkov wrote:

> >> 	current_source_end_addr = start_addr + size;
> >> 
> >> but must be:
> >> 
> >> 	current_source_end_addr = start_addr + size + <addr sizeof>;
> >> 
> >> As I understand, since machine address size is not known at 
> >time of parsing 
> >> coff file, then we have big trouble :(.
> >
> >Could you explain why you need to add in the size of an address?
> 
> It's not necessarily must be addr sizeof, it may be 1, but, I think,
> will be better, if current_source_end_addr will contain correct 
> value for target.

What I'd like to understand is why (start_addr + size) is insufficient.
I.e, why do we need to add 1 or some other small value to compute the
correct ending address?

Kevin