Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING
@ 2002-04-24  8:35 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
  2002-04-24 17:48 ` Elena Zannoni
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain @ 2002-04-24  8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: davem, ezannoni; +Cc: gdb-patches, gdb, kevinb, Peter.Schauer

For what it's worth, my native i686-pc-linux-gnu test bed has no
regressions with this patch (five gcc's with -gdwarf-2 and -gstabs+).

Michael C


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1020422152449.ZM1373@localhost.localdomain>]
* Re: [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING (was Re: multi-arch TODO)
@ 2002-04-23 10:58 Michael Snyder
  2002-04-23 12:10 ` Kevin Buettner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2002-04-23 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Kevin Buettner; +Cc: David S. Miller, gdb, gdb-patches

Kevin Buettner wrote:
> 
> On Apr 23,  3:00am, David S. Miller wrote:
> 
> >    >   Why don't all Linux targets define this?  Do some binutils ports
> >    >   perform this optimization and others not?  Or was there some bug
> >    >   in N_FUN/N_SO stabs in binutils and/or gcc that this is papering
> >    >   around?  kevinb@cyghat.com is the one who added this to powerpc
> >    >   and i386 Linux.
> >
> >    I haven't given it a lot of thought recently, but my opinion is that
> >    the SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING code ought to be enabled everywhere.
> >    The only downside that I can think of is that we lose the ability
> >    to put a symbol at address 0.
> >
> > Sounds find to me, how about this patch?
> >
> > 2002-04-23  David S. Miller  <davem@redhat.com>
> >
> >       * config/i386/tm-i386sol2.h, config/i386/tm-linux.h,
> >       config/powerpc/tm-linux.h, config/powerpc/tm-ppc-eabi.h,
> >       config/sparc/tm-sun4sol2.h (SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING): Kill.
> >       * dbxread.c, elfread.c, minsyms.c, mdebugread.c, symmisc.c,
> >       symtab.h (whole file): Act as if SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING was
> >       always defined, kill ifdefs.
> 
> Yes, this is exactly what I had in mind.  It looks okay to me, but it
> needs to be carefully considered and approved (or not) by the symtab
> maintainers.
> 
> As noted earlier, the downside is that we lose the ability to put a
> symbol at address 0.  This doesn't pose a problem for operating
> systems which'll never map part of the program at address 0, but there
> may be some embedded environments for which this is a concern.

Replace "may be" with "almost certainly are".


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2002-04-25  0:53 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-04-24  8:35 [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-04-24 17:48 ` Elena Zannoni
     [not found] <1020422152449.ZM1373@localhost.localdomain>
2002-04-23  3:10 ` [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING (was Re: multi-arch TODO) David S. Miller
2002-04-23  6:52   ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-23  7:01     ` [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING David S. Miller
2002-04-23  9:05       ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-04-23 12:05   ` [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING (was Re: multi-arch TODO) Elena Zannoni
2002-04-23 23:13     ` [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING David S. Miller
2002-04-24  1:03     ` David S. Miller
2002-04-24 17:40       ` Elena Zannoni
2002-04-24 17:53         ` David S. Miller
2002-04-24  1:13     ` David S. Miller
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-23 10:58 [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING (was Re: multi-arch TODO) Michael Snyder
2002-04-23 12:10 ` Kevin Buettner
2002-04-23 23:11   ` [RFA] Kill SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING David S. Miller

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox