From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16829 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2007 11:43:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 16819 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Mar 2007 11:43:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:42:59 +0100 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01AB4B267; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 06:42:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D27F4B262; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 06:42:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HWWYK-0001js-G3; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:42:56 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 11:43:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts , Denis PILAT Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] -thread-select double print stack frame Message-ID: <20070328114256.GA2688@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , Denis PILAT , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20070328021123.GA28506@caradoc.them.org> <17930.715.767042.438147@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <460A2681.30700@st.com> <45FE948B.9090007@st.com> <17919.12645.81319.568064@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <4607C863.7080405@st.com> <20070327193257.GM28164@caradoc.them.org> <17929.36634.510715.364996@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20070328021123.GA28506@caradoc.them.org> <17930.715.767042.438147@farnswood.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <460A2681.30700@st.com> <17930.715.767042.438147@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14+cvs20070313 (2007-03-13) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00287.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 05:53:15PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > I was looking specifically at this clause in print_source_lines_base: > > if (desc < 0) Right, that's where it comes from. > I think this code may only be reached when there is duplicated MI output. I don't know. Some of the source-related commands may also call print_source_lines, in which case they'll get here too - without a frame printout. > > This does make me wonder about the patch though. Denis, could you > > hold off on committing it? Which duplicate copy are you eliminating? > > Maybe we should diff two testsuite runs to see what else changes. > > No, I think this change is alright (I haven't run the testsuite though.). You're right, anyway. That's what I get for reviewing patches while I'm so tired. I was worried that the copy inside the frame={} tuple was being eliminated by this change, but that's definitely not what happens. Only -thread-select of everything in our testsuite changed. On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 10:25:37AM +0200, Denis PILAT wrote: > I do run the testsuite on i386-linux native target, no regression at all. > Can I commit or not ? Yes, go ahead. Thanks. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery