From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22893 invoked by alias); 19 Jul 2002 18:52:25 -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 22882 invoked from network); 19 Jul 2002 18:52:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jul 2002 18:52:25 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8520C3D92; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 14:52:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D385FE8.1080308@ges.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:04:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020708 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Theodore Roth Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] fix for avr_skip_prologue() References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00421.txt.bz2 > Hi, > > Before I commit this, I wanted to know if this is the correct fix or just > an evil hack side-stepping the some other problem. > > The problem shows up when I set a break point on a simple function as > such: > > (gdb) b foo_simple > > If foo_simple() has no prologue, the break point is set at the _end_ of > the function (effectively the return insn). > > If this fix is acceptable, is it too late to make it into the 5.2 branch? > > Ted Roth I think so :-( By the time someone has figured out if it is right or wrong, I'll have finished rolling 5.2.1. Andrew