From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13583 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2005 18:40:20 -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 13517 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2005 18:40:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO krynn.se.axis.com) (212.209.10.221) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 14 Jan 2005 18:40:10 -0000 Received: from ignucius.se.axis.com (ignucius.se.axis.com [10.83.5.18]) by krynn.se.axis.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-5local0.1) with ESMTP id j0EIe6uK027584; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:40:06 +0100 Received: from ignucius.se.axis.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ignucius.se.axis.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Debian-2woody1) with ESMTP id j0EIe6dD031395; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:40:06 +0100 Received: (from hp@localhost) by ignucius.se.axis.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Debian-2woody1) id j0EIe674031391; Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:40:06 +0100 Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:40:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200501141840.j0EIe674031391@ignucius.se.axis.com> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: orjan.friberg@axis.com CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, kettenis@gnu.org, hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com In-reply-to: <41E7FD09.4000002@axis.com> (message from Orjan Friberg on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:10:33 +0100) Subject: Re: [CRIS] Reading core file selects "wrong" mach X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00157.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:10:33 +0100 > From: Orjan Friberg > Maybe there's an easier way to do it - simply call the elf backend before > processing the program headers, and have the backend set the correct machine > like they all seem to do already. Since the decision of whether to act on the > e_flags value is pushed to the elf backend I don't see how this could break > anything (which I assume could happen if it was done in elf_core_file_p). Sure. Seems right at a glance, but you should check elf_backend_object_p of all ports so they don't use data set in the code around which you moved the call. > I understand this will have to be sent to the binutils mailing list for > approval, but I'd appreciate if someone on this list could tell me if it's a > sane solution. The people at binutils@ are supposedly more aware of issues related to this kind of change, meaning you're likely to get more initiated feedback there regarding the saneness. mvh H-P