From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8631 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2003 08:14:49 -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 8624 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2003 08:14:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kerberos.suse.cz) (195.47.106.10) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 27 Feb 2003 08:14:48 -0000 Received: from chimera.suse.cz (chimera.suse.cz [10.20.0.2]) by kerberos.suse.cz (SuSE SMTP server) with ESMTP id 7DF0359D350; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:14:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from suse.cz (naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16]) by chimera.suse.cz (8.11.0/8.11.0/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with ESMTP id h1R8Ek420767; Thu, 27 Feb 2003 09:14:47 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: chimera.suse.cz: Host naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16] claimed to be suse.cz Message-ID: <3E5DC8F6.9010301@suse.cz> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 08:14:00 -0000 From: Michal Ludvig Organization: SuSE CR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: cs, cz, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: GDB Patches , Andrew Cagney , Elena Zannoni Subject: Re: PING: [RFA] Runtime Dwarf2 CFI engine cleanup References: <3E197C8F.3010903@suse.cz> <15934.38824.98344.150611@localhost.redhat.com> <3E479B6A.30705@suse.cz> <3E5CDEB8.2050008@suse.cz> <20030226154714.GA11458@nevyn.them.org> <3E5D05F9.6050605@redhat.com> <20030226183555.GA16345@nevyn.them.org> <3E5D16BB.4090603@redhat.com> <20030226193829.GA20735@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20030226193829.GA20735@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00764.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > In any case I am withdrawing my attempt to be helpful, since obviously > I'm being pushy again instead of helpful. Michal can go back to > waiting for someone else's response since my "help" has obviously > injured the entire process. Thank you very much, anyway! You at least attempted to solve this issue. Other "responsible" maintainers didn't bother to respond until you approved my patch. Then Andrew felt he should step in, revert your approval and say NO (why there doesn't come a *constructive* critique along with your no, Andrew?). And Elena - apparently the only one who could say yes - disappeared... Sigh. I'm asking once again: - Can I *at* *least* commit the dwarf2cfi.c part? Without the infcmd.c hook? I know it duplicates the solib cleaner logic, but is that a showstopper? - Ad run_command() hook - would something like this be acceptable? Index: config/i386/tm-x86-64linux.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/config/i386/tm-x86-64linux.h,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -p -r1.1 tm-x86-64linux.h --- config/i386/tm-x86-64linux.h 1 Jul 2002 22:09:52 -0000 1.1 +++ config/i386/tm-x86-64linux.h 27 Feb 2003 08:02:50 -0000 @@ -33,4 +33,6 @@ #define SVR4_SHARED_LIBS #include "solib.h" /* Support for shared libraries. */ +#define DWARF2CFI_USED + #endif /* #ifndef TM_X86_64LINUX_H */ Index: infcmd.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/infcmd.c,v retrieving revision 1.54.6.2 diff -u -p -r1.54.6.2 infcmd.c --- infcmd.c 25 Sep 2002 20:43:21 -0000 1.54.6.2 +++ infcmd.c 27 Feb 2003 08:02:50 -0000 @@ -390,6 +390,10 @@ Start it from the beginning? ")) clear_breakpoint_hit_counts (); +#if defined(DWARF2CFI_USED) + cleanup_cfi (); +#endif + /* Purge old solib objfiles. */ objfile_purge_solibs (); Every target that will use the CFI engine will just add one define to their tm.h. No need to link dwarf2cfi.o to all targets. Comments? Michal Ludvig -- * SuSE CR, s.r.o * mludvig@suse.cz * (+420) 296.545.373 * http://www.suse.cz