From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11615 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2010 21:07:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 11606 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jul 2010 21:07:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:07:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o62L7XBj003868 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:07:33 -0400 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o62L7UNv017952 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:07:32 -0400 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o62L7UFA001246; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 23:07:30 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o62L7Ton001240; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 23:07:29 +0200 Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:07:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: RFC: libunwind-frame.c -vs- optimized-out Message-ID: <20100702210728.GA631@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) 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: 2010-07/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:42:36 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > So, this seems like the logic is possibly backward. Yes, it also seems to me so. Your change is an incoremental improvement. If there are no regressions approving the check-in. > The appended patch fixes the IA-64 regressions. However, I am reluctant > to commit it without understanding what is going on here. [commit] Update libunwind & ia64 unwinders From: Joel Brobecker http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2008-05/msg00246.html BTW I sometimes found it difficult myself that value >1< nullifies validity of a value so I understand the ease of such bug. Thanks, Jan