From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12627 invoked by alias); 18 Jan 2013 13:15:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 12610 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jan 2013 13:15:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,TW_EG 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; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:15:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 935142E67C; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:15:17 -0500 (EST) 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 PjpVmFRKfiXf; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:15:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE3E2E4A1; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 08:15:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B4E3C3EEF; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 17:15:11 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 13:15:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jiong Wang Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Walter Lee Subject: Re: [RFC/TileGX 2/6] simplify the handling of skip prologue for plt stub Message-ID: <20130118131511.GF3564@adacore.com> References: <50F91516.6010204@tilera.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50F91516.6010204@tilera.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: 2013-01/txt/msg00416.txt.bz2 > for tilegx, when skip prologue, if the start_pc is a plt stub address, then > stop to go further, just return the start_pc. > > gdb/ChangeLog: > > * tilegx-tdep.c (tilegx_skip_prologue): simplify the handling for > plt stub. Can you provide an example where this becomes necessary? I don't see a problem with the patch per se, but I don't remember seeing other ports doing this... -- Joel