From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28471 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2004 13:31:37 -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 28366 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2004 13:31:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Dec 2004 13:31:31 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1Cckrc-0002t1-L8; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 08:31:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Jeff Johnston , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA]: Modified Watchthreads Patch Message-ID: <20041210133116.GA11060@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Jeff Johnston , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <41B8E16D.6070505@redhat.com> <01c4deb2$Blat.v2.2.2$ce83b6e0@zahav.net.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01c4deb2$Blat.v2.2.2$ce83b6e0@zahav.net.il> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00264.txt.bz2 On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 02:20:39PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Hmm... the new function insert_watchpoints_for_new_thread is called > only by ia64_linux_new_thread. Is there any policy for functions that > are only used by a single port? Do we care that all the other GDB > builds will get a useless function compiled into them? Should we > perhaps #ifdef it away conditioned on some symbol? Let's not. Conditional compilation is bad... if it were more than a single function, we could move it into its own file. However, I think ia64_linux_new_thread's use should be taken as an example. If I understand Jeff's patch correctly, a number of other targets with hardware watchpoints will need it also. -- Daniel Jacobowitz