From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27096 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2004 23:27:31 -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 26879 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2004 23:27:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO arwen.tausq.org) (64.81.244.109) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2004 23:27:26 -0000 Received: by arwen.tausq.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 545C36BE2E; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:27:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:37:00 -0000 From: Randolph Chung To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/hppa] Change handling of stubs in the return path Message-ID: <20041206232723.GS6359@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung References: <20041206223712.GQ6359@tausq.org> <20041206230631.GB31381@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041206230631.GB31381@nevyn.them.org> X-GPG: for GPG key, see http://www.tausq.org/gpg.txt User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00178.txt.bz2 > Does this work OK when single stepping out of something, i.e. back into > a stub? when you step out of a function that was called with a stub, you end up back at the caller, not the stub. is that what you mean? (when we step into the stub, gdb detects that it is in a solib return trampoline and runs the inferior until it is out of the trampoline). that part is not really affected by this patch though. > > +static void > > +hppa_hpux_unwind_adjust_stub(struct frame_info *next_frame, CORE_ADDR base, > > + struct trad_frame_saved_reg *saved_regs) > > Formatting ;-) sorry, the original version is ok, but i did some manual editting of the file with vim that had expandtab set... randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/