From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28416 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2009 16:10:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 28387 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Sep 2009 16:10:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:10:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC15C2BAB9A; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:10:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ZW4LFdu3VvSc; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:10:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21372BAB0D; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:10:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 47EA6F593D; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:10:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jonas Maebe Cc: tromey@redhat.com, Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Set calling convention of methods Message-ID: <20090930161001.GD10338@adacore.com> References: <7B6EF4DA-76C8-4D9C-8B9F-94153EF1C4E1@elis.ugent.be> <691B0BA8-C606-42FF-A796-76CC9C31556A@elis.ugent.be> <200904222215.n3MMF0p2006994@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <19C107AA-5271-4C23-A6D2-AFF75BBAC4E4@elis.ugent.be> <5AA3BCA9-1ECF-446E-8B49-3132F0E470FB@elis.ugent.be> <20090930000225.GA10338@adacore.com> <8F3B6095-4766-432D-ABB5-AB4DAA2D5572@elis.ugent.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8F3B6095-4766-432D-ABB5-AB4DAA2D5572@elis.ugent.be> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-09/txt/msg00950.txt.bz2 >> As far as I am concerned, I can't see a problem with using DWARF >> declarations even from stabs. > > We could include the dwarf2.h header in the stabs reader and set the > calling convention to DW_CC_normal in all cases. That, or explicitly document that calling smash_to_method_type with a calling_convention=0 means a normal calling convention. We'd then just add an extra check at the beginning of this function that translates calling_convention from zero to DW_CC_normal. My money is on including dwarf2.h from stabsread.c. We do this from other places, so why not from stabsread.c? >> This part is maintained by binutils, I believe. You'll need >> to ask them for approval of this change. > > Tom said it came from gcc > (http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-04/msg00063.html) and I did > submit a patch there: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-04/msg00301.html . I did not get > any reaction to that patch (and I guess it's not been applied). That's really strange, because if you look at include/MAINTAINERS: % cat include/MAINTAINERS See ../binutils/MAINTAINERS So, my guess is that this file is maintained by binutils, and that GCC should stay up to date. If they have local changes there, they should merge them into binutils so that both copies stay in sync. > Later on, Tom clarified that he thought that the gdb and gcc versions of > dwarf2.h should actually be merged into a single copy, but that I > shouldn't worry about this since the divergence started before my patch: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-04/msg00099.html Right, this shouldn't be your problem. But they should welcome your help if you send patches to make things right again. Double-check with the binutils people that they indeed "own" that file first. -- Joel