From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain@cygnus.com>
To: chastain@cygnus.com, fnasser@redhat.com
Cc: ac131313@cygnus.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, keiths@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] Assuming malloc exists in callfwmall.exp
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 09:00:00 -0000
Message-id: <200102151700.JAA26371@bosch.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00258.html

> I don't get it.  malloc is not used at all when the argument is not a
> string.  So, what malloc() being available or not has to do with this
> situation?

The point is that use case #3 should keep working, even if
someone changes gdb.

Suppose I check in a patch tomorrow to allocate the call dummy in malloc'd
memory instead of the target's stack.

Would that be a problem?
If it is a problem, what test case can catch it?

Michael