From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20824 invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2007 06:40:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 20813 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Oct 2007 06:40:49 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:40:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9G6ej2Q018869 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 02:40:45 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.20]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9G6eial024256 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 02:40:44 -0400 Received: from ironwood.lan (vpn-14-73.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.73]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9G6ehd6019563 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 02:40:44 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:53:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] m32r-tdep.c: Fix sign extension problem during prologue analysis Message-ID: <20071015234038.29fe69f4@ironwood.lan> In-Reply-To: <20071011012950.GA17345@caradoc.them.org> References: <20071010170252.65259f1a@ironwood.lan> <20071011012950.GA17345@caradoc.them.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.10.4; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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/msg00415.txt.bz2 On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:29:50 -0400 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > Comments? (Is there a better way to do the sign extension?) > > That seems right to me. You could be more explicit about it, but > there's no point if you assume that char is eight bits anyway. Thanks for looking at this patch. I've committed it now. Kevin