From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16766 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2002 16:47:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16694 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2002 16:47:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Apr 2002 16:47:36 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08906; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3CB70EF9.2FB421AA@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 09:47:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser Organization: Red Hat Canada X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: fnf@redhat.com CC: jimb@redhat.com, fnf@ninemoons.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Andrew Cagney , Michael Snyder Subject: Re: RFC: Avoid calling XXX_skip_prologue for assembly code References: <200204121636.g3CGaGk08573@fishpond.ninemoons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00460.txt.bz2 Fred Fish wrote: > > > I strongly object to this patch unless accompanied by a set/show > > command. (But I am not the maintainer.) > > There seems to be enough issues with this patch that perhaps I should > just withdraw it. The alternate solution is to fix the skip_prologue > functions that don't do the right thing with assembly language > prologues that don't follow normal conventions. The original > motivation for this patch was an architecture where skip_prologue > always returned PC+2 regardless of what it found. > It should not be too difficult to add a set/show variable. But if you can't spare the time, and if people agree with this solution, you could just enter your patch in the bug database and say it is pending the creation of the switch. Eventually someone will get at the bug entry and do it. Regards, Fernando P.S.: Note that I agree with the patch, if controlled by a behavior variable. My objection is just against hardwiring it. -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9