From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20519 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2011 22:03:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 20511 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jul 2011 22:03:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_LV 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; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:02:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6B72BADE2; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 18:02:45 -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 S89Ble7mb4PR; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 18:02:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7436A2BAD9D; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 18:02:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7010D145615; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:18:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Paul Pluzhnikov Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Yuri , Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [patch,7.3] Fix JIT clang-lli gdb-7.3 regression Re: [gdb-7.3] Error in gdb-llvm integration: Unable to read JIT descriptor from remote memory! Message-ID: <20110705220239.GZ2407@adacore.com> References: <4E0FAB8D.2070709@rawbw.com> <20110704214654.GA21844@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20110705170728.GY2407@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00178.txt.bz2 > Another option is to apply a better fix (provided it is deemed safe) ... Thanks for doing that :) Your fix certainly looks a lot nicer than Jan's! After careful reading, I think the patch makes sense, but having never looked at this code before, it would be better if someone else approved. Can Doug approve the patch, for instance? The patch is OK for 7.3 if OK for HEAD. > 2011-07-05 Paul Pluzhnikov > > jit.c (jit_breakpoint_re_set_internal): Call jit_inferior_init. Should we say that you're also adding jit_inferior_init's declaration? Note that some of us (myself included) prefer moving functions rather than having to write a declaration which duplicates the amount of work to do when the function profile changes. But others disagree, and would rather use these declarations to allow them to order the functions in a certain order of their liking... I think that for the 7.3 branch we'll definitely want your version, to keep the patch as small and simple as possible, but you're free to choose whichever style you might prefer. > testsuite/ChangeLog: > > 2011-07-05 Paul Pluzhnikov > > * gdb.base/jit-so.exp: New test. > * gdb.base/jit-dlmain.c: New file. > * gdb.base/jit-main.c: Allow "main" to be elsewhere. Cheers, -- Joel