Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [rfa:symtab] deprecate inside_entry_func
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 17:31:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1031107173135.ZM17860@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org> "Re: [rfa:symtab] deprecate inside_entry_func" (Oct 31,  9:27pm)

On Oct 31,  9:27pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> > Kevin, you previously wrote:
> > 
> >> >> I'd like to avoid re-introducing a dependency on inside_entry_func() as 
> >> >> that places garish requirements on the object file readers :-(
> > 
> >> > 
> >> > I agree that object file readers should not attempt to track of
> >> > the bounds of the start function.  However, given an arbitrary
> >> > address, it's not unreasonable to ask the symtab machinery to attempt
> >> > to figure out the function bounds.  And, in fact, this is just what
> >> > find_pc_partial_function() does.
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, the reason I wrote this was to note that there are other ways of
> > implementing inside_entry_func() which wouldn't place garish
> > requirements on the object file readers.
> 
> Then I'm puzzled as to why you are objecting to me deprecating this 
> existing garish hack?  Remember, I also wrote:
> 
>  > +  /* NOTE: cagney/2003-10-31: A very simple test, such as
>  > +     get_frame_func == entry_point should be sufficient for
>  > +     identifying a pc in the entry function.  Does anyone know why it
>  > +     wasn't sufficient and hence, why the very convoluted
>  > +     "deprecated_inside_entry_func" is needed.  */

What I'm suggesting is that you implement inside_entry_func() using
"get_frame_func == entry_point".  What's so garish about that?

Kevin


  reply	other threads:[~2003-11-07 17:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-11-01  0:07 Andrew Cagney
2003-11-01  0:37 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-11-01  0:46   ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-01  0:55     ` Kevin Buettner
2003-11-01  2:27       ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-07 17:31         ` Kevin Buettner [this message]
2003-11-07 21:25           ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-01  0:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-01  2:37   ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-09  0:13     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-09  2:40       ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-09  3:50         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 19:53 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-21 19:59   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 20:11     ` Kevin Buettner
2003-11-21 20:46     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-21 20:48       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 20:55         ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-21 21:04           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 21:24             ` Kevin Buettner
2003-11-21 21:54               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 22:40                 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-11-22  0:37             ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-22  0:41               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-21 20:07   ` David Carlton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1031107173135.ZM17860@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=kevinb@redhat.com \
    --cc=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox