From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-53386-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 21985 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2008 22:12:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 21976 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2008 22:12:09 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from bluesmobile.specifix.com (HELO bluesmobile.specifix.com) (216.129.118.140)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:11:44 +0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bluesmobile.specifix.com [216.129.118.140]) 	by bluesmobile.specifix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA8F03C939; 	Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [OB] comment fix, corelow.c
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@specifix.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-Reply-To: <20080116140419.GA30426@caradoc.them.org>
References: <1200446218.3263.40.camel@localhost.localdomain> 	 <20080116140419.GA30426@caradoc.them.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:12:00 -0000
Message-Id: <1200521502.3263.63.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-4.fc7)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00418.txt.bz2

On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 09:04 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 05:16:58PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > cut and paste botch...
> 
> FYI, no objection, but I think it was right the way it was too...
> 
> >  	return (*ops->deprecated_xfer_memory) (offset, readbuf,
> > -					       len, 0/*write*/, NULL, ops);
> > +					       len, 0/*read*/, NULL, ops);
> 
> The value of the parameter is 0, and its name was write.

I don't think the comment refers to the name of the parameter.

If you look, there are two adjacent calls to xfer_memory:

if (readbuf)
  return (*ops->deprecated_xfer_memory) (offset, readbuf,
                                         len, 0/*read*/, NULL, ops);
if (writebuf)
  return (*ops->deprecated_xfer_memory) (offset, (gdb_byte *) writebuf,
                                         len, 1/*write*/, NULL, ops);

One call is a read, the other is a write.

None of the other parameters have their names in a comment.