From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22338 invoked by alias); 10 May 2012 21:21:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 22324 invoked by uid 22791); 10 May 2012 21:21:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO 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; Thu, 10 May 2012 21:20:57 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 738C61C6CA0; Thu, 10 May 2012 17:20:56 -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 1-qvoiXXIddA; Thu, 10 May 2012 17:20:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1771C6C59; Thu, 10 May 2012 17:20:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6989B145616; Thu, 10 May 2012 14:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 21:21:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, cltang@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] New gdb arch hook: return_with_first_hidden_param_p Message-ID: <20120510212054.GA5886@adacore.com> References: <1334755073-26528-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <20120503011435.GA3294@adacore.com> <4FA22D7B.1040707@codesourcery.com> <20120504175830.GQ15555@adacore.com> <4FA743EC.1080903@codesourcery.com> <20120507201345.GX15555@adacore.com> <4FAA2D25.4060700@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FAA2D25.4060700@codesourcery.com> 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 > Agreed. I stared at these debug info for a while, but unable to have > a clue on heuristics. My feeling is that these debug info doesn't give > us more than what source code can give, but the heuristics we are looking > for are about the difference on different targets, given the same source. > That is to say, on different targets, although the number of parameters > is different, the debug info is almost the same and hard to get heuristics, Can we use the fact that functions that have their first parameter be a nameless, artificial, paramter whose type is a pointer to the return type? Or would this heuristics trigger in other situations? If that doesn't work, then I am running out of ideas, and then we'll have to start looking giving GDB insider knowledge. But I really don't like that idea. -- Joel