From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29364 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2011 23:06:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 29344 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Oct 2011 23:06:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (HELO mtagate1.uk.ibm.com) (194.196.100.161) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:05:56 +0000 Received: from d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.38.233]) by mtagate1.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p94N5svQ031752 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 23:05:54 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1507.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p94N5swm2121732 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2011 00:05:54 +0100 Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p94N5rIh011634 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 17:05:53 -0600 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id p94N5qTW011596; Tue, 4 Oct 2011 17:05:52 -0600 Message-Id: <201110042305.p94N5qTW011596@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 05 Oct 2011 01:05:52 +0200 Subject: Re: [RFA] fetch result of locdesc expressions as integer (not address) To: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker) Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:06:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com (Jan Kratochvil) In-Reply-To: <20111004193739.GM19246@adacore.com> from "Joel Brobecker" at Oct 04, 2011 12:37:39 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2011-10/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker wrote: > > It seems the problem is a bit more complex: different callers > > of decode_locdesc have different expectations. As the comment > > before the routine says: > > > > NOTE drow/2003-11-18: This function is called in two situations > > now: for the address of static or global variables (partial symbols > > only) and for offsets into structures which are expected to be > > (more or less) constant. > > That's true, but my interpretation was the callers of decode_locdesc > should know which they expect it to me, and thus know to apply > the integer_to_address correction. Well, maybe they should, but right now they don't, and neither does your patch add any such correction. The point I was trying to make is that therefore, your patch as it is, while fixing one class of bugs on some targets, may simultaneously introduce a different class of bugs on other targets. I'm not sure this is a good idea ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com