From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20542 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2007 02:24:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 20533 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Oct 2007 02:24:40 -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; Sun, 14 Oct 2007 02:24:38 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C82A982AD for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2007 02:24:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 133B3981F3 for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2007 02:24:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Igt9e-00077b-Ne for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 22:24:34 -0400 Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:55:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Teach i386 prologue reader about _alloca and __main Message-ID: <20071014022434.GA27099@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <47112285.2080100@portugalmail.pt> <20071013202615.GA9946@caradoc.them.org> <471134B9.5060609@portugalmail.pt> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <471134B9.5060609@portugalmail.pt> 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: 2007-10/txt/msg00367.txt.bz2 On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 10:12:25PM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > The __main call is not i386 specific. Eg. arm-wince has the same problem. Yes, but it's only set in i386-specific code and only checked in i386-specific code; so if it's just a variable in the tdep struct, then ARM can have a similar one. If you want to handle it from common code, of course, that's a different story. > I'm mostly asking for advice on: > > - Is the gdb-only solution preferable? That is, the line info > currently marks the prologue ending *before* the __main call. > Last year's version changed that, this one doesn't. Does anyone > see any problem with that? I have no strong preference either way. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery