From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26133 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2004 01:19:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26122 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2004 01:19:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Apr 2004 01:19:24 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id E330347D63; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 01:19:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Randolph Chung Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] fix unwind handling on hppa elf targets Message-ID: <20040412011924.GL1114@gnat.com> References: <20040410094328.GA31873@tausq.org> <20040410165744.GH1114@gnat.com> <20040410174501.GB31873@tausq.org> <20040410172010.GI1114@gnat.com> <20040410180956.GC31873@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040410180956.GC31873@tausq.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00249.txt.bz2 > i've done some testing. any particular scenario you want me to test? > there are hundreds of test failures on hppa (hpux and linux) so it's > difficult to use that to gauge a patch, I know, but I'd like to avoid that number of failures to grow, so I really think rerunning the testsuite at each patch is useful. > I should also point out that i only test against gcc/binutils. if you > are interested in hpux toolchain please give that a spin. I don't have access to the HPUX tools, so I also test using GCC/GNAT too. Michael Chastain, on the other hand, has been giving this combination several spins. He sends his results from time to time. Anyway: I verified your patch against the testsuite on HPUX 11 with both 32bits and 64bits modes. No regression reported. I should note that I had to modify your patch for two things: - zero initialize the tdep structure, but allocation using XZALLOC instead of the XMALLOC macro. - Tweak the patch to add a #include of hppa-tdep.h in hppa-hpux-tdep.c. Your patch seems to be dependent on another patch which I wasn't able to locate in the gdb-patches archives. So I just did this tweak which was good enough for my purpose. (oh, and the patch to hppa-tdep.h didn't apply cleanly either - for the same reason I would imagine) (I should also add that I couldn't review your patch, not enough knowledge about hppa/hpux and not enough time right now to study it. I hope somebody else will be able to help you there). -- Joel