Re: [patch] Re: "optimized out" on gdb.base/gdb1090.exp

[Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:21:48 +0200, Edjunior Barbosa Machado wrote:
> Checking out the original PR 1090 that originated this testcase, it doesn't
> mention any particularity regarding frame or backtrace, which leads me to
> believe that changing where 'print' is called should not affect the main
> focus of the testcase.

PR 1090 should have been about "allocate a variable into multiple registers"
which is still being tested so the testcase should be OK even this way.
 <2><8d>: Abbrev Number: 8 (DW_TAG_variable)
    <8e>   DW_AT_name        : s24
[...]
    <98>   DW_AT_location    : 6 byte block: 53 93 4 56 93 4    (DW_OP_reg3 (ebx); DW_OP_piece: 4; DW_OP_reg6 (esi); DW_OP_piece: 4)


On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 03:26:11 +0200, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 04/13/2011 05:21 AM, Edjunior Barbosa Machado wrote:
> > 
> > 2011-04-12  Edjunior Machado  <emachado@br.ibm.com>
> > 
> >     * testsuite/gdb.base/gdb1090.exp: change breakpoint location to   
> > read the
> 
> Please remove spurious spaces between "to" and "read".
> 
> >     content of 's24' correctly (avoiding "optimized out").
> >     * testsuite/gdb.base/gdb1090.c: add comment in order to set breakpoint.
>         ^^^^^^^^^  Delete "testsuite/", since this changelog entry will
> go to gdb/testsuite/ChangLog.

And the first letter of the sentence should be capital.
	http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Style-of-Change-Logs.html#Style-of-Change-Logs

Please check it in with those changes.


Thanks,
Jan