From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12877 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2012 15:33:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 12843 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Oct 2012 15:33:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 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, 18 Oct 2012 15:33:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19A21C76A6; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:33:13 -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 yL+i46HJKqKt; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:33:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B11A11C6EFD; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:33:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BB39DC4BF7; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:33:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Pedro Alves Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: probable rs6000-aix-tdep.c bug found by clang Message-ID: <20121018153304.GS3050@adacore.com> References: <87mwzk279g.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20121017212417.GP3050@adacore.com> <507FC786.50400@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <507FC786.50400@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-10/txt/msg00326.txt.bz2 > >> * rs6000-aix-tdep.c (rs6000_aix_osabi_sniffer): Remove extraneous > >> semicolon. > > I suspect this is the root cause of PR8966 (AIX 5.1 single_step configuration > is broken). http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8966 > > We're always returning the _UNKNOWN osabi, so this is unreachable: On the contrary, I think we always returned the AIX osabi. > > So, isn't rs6000_aix_osabi_sniffer going to be called if, and only > > if, the bfd has a bfd_target_xcoff_flavour, thus making the check > > superfluous? > > Sure looks like it. OK - I will take care of removing the condition and simplifying the function. -- Joel