From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13026 invoked by alias); 1 May 2012 14:05:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 13007 invoked by uid 22791); 1 May 2012 14:05:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_EG,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; Tue, 01 May 2012 14:05:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q41E52VS013840 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 1 May 2012 10:05:02 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.17]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q41E4wSM021115 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 1 May 2012 10:05:01 -0400 Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 14:05:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] MIPS16 FP manual call/return fixes Message-ID: <20120501140457.GA1691@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <87mx5y70mv.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 23:42:44 +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > + find_pc_partial_function_gnu_ifunc (b->loc->address, NULL, > + &func_func_addr, NULL, &is_gnu_ifunc); > + gdb_assert (is_gnu_ifunc); Please remove that gdb_assert and fall back somehow, IMO just pass FUNCTION as NULL in such case. Any resolving ADDRESS->SYMBOL can be ambiguous with weird symbol files and it may find some overlapping non-IFUNC symbol instead. Also user may have unloaded symbol files in the middle of the debugging etc. Otherwise OK from me for the IFUNC part. FYI getting with your original patch: bfin-tdep.c: In function 'bfin_gdbarch_init': bfin-tdep.c:841:3: error: passing argument 2 of 'set_gdbarch_return_value' from incompatible pointer type [-Werror] In file included from defs.h:945:0, from bfin-tdep.c:22: gdbarch.h:452:13: note: expected 'enum return_value_convention (*)(struct gdbarch *, struct value *, struct type *, struct regcache *, gdb_byte *, const gdb_byte *)' but argument is of type 'enum return_value_convention (*)(struct gdbarch *, struct type *, struct type *, struct regcache *, gdb_byte *, const gdb_byte *)' So maybe your patch I used is already obsolete or be sure you run with "--enable-64-bit-bfd --enable-targets=all". Thanks, Jan