From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7105 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2003 14:37:55 -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 7080 invoked from network); 6 Oct 2003 14:37:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Oct 2003 14:37:52 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995F32B8E; Mon, 6 Oct 2003 10:37:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F817E3F.4050007@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:37:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: kevinb@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] TARGET_ADJUST_BREAKPOINT_ADDRESS - patch 1 of 4 References: <1031004002813.ZM24546@localhost.localdomain> <200310061249.h96CnP6f000466@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:28:13 -0700 > From: Kevin Buettner > > The patch below should be non-controversial. It merely adds the > TARGET_ADJUST_BREAKPOINT_ADDRESS method. Code which uses it (the > possibly controversial bit) will come in patch #3. Documentation will > be in the next patch, #2. Finally, target specific code which > requires TARGET_ADJUST_BREAKPOINT_ADDRESS will be posted in patch #4. > > Do we really need the "TARGET" in the name of the new method? It made > me think that this was something that was going to be added to the > target-vector instead of the architecture vector. Good point (making note that the term 'target architecture' really doesn't make sense). Andrew