From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31124 invoked by alias); 10 May 2007 21:45:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 31108 invoked by uid 22791); 10 May 2007 21:45:12 -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; Thu, 10 May 2007 21:45:09 +0000 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700EC4B267; Thu, 10 May 2007 16:45:08 -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 5B4704B262; Thu, 10 May 2007 16:45:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HmGRg-0000wn-10; Thu, 10 May 2007 17:45:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 21:45:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, eliz@gnu.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Replace deprecated_target_new_objfile_hook by observer Message-ID: <20070510214507.GA3187@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, eliz@gnu.org References: <20070507214706.GA18459@caradoc.them.org> <200705072230.l47MUOin027409@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200705072230.l47MUOin027409@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-05/txt/msg00172.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 12:30:24AM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Hmm, it was quite useful when implementing SPU overlay support > (see the patch set I just sent out). I'm using it to attach > a target-specific overlay table data structure to each objfile > as it is read in. > > There didn't seem to be any other callback that was just right > for this (e.g. executable_changed is called already before the > symfile_objfile is instantiated) ... > > Any suggestions how to solve this differently? Well, looking at your SPU patches, that seems like a good use of this observer. So it's fine with me. All the other places you've converted are less clear; if you fixed exactly when the two existing observers get called they'd probably cover everything else. But per-objfile data wants a direct correlation with objfile creation. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery