From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32366 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2007 21:28:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 32357 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jun 2007 21:28:29 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:28:27 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07ED9982F2; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:28:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A84BF982F1; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:28:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HzJLS-0001Yr-HV; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:28:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:28:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Eliminate write_register from solib-sunos.c Message-ID: <20070615212838.GA5986@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200706151646.l5FGkJ4I000248@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <200706151658.l5FGwTK3017869@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200706151658.l5FGwTK3017869@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: 2007-06/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:58:29PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > So, if that's OK with you, I'd like to commit my original patch > that leaves the "if (DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK)" block in, and simply > replaces the write_register call with write_pc. I've now tested > that patch on my i386-openbsd3.3 setup with no regressions. If you have a moment, could you add an explanation of why this is necessary to the code? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery