From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Fix inside entry func call
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 22:19:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40201E5A.70605@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040203172553.GA20758@nevyn.them.org>
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 11:06:15PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> This, cleans up one part of a long dangling thread. Per:
>> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-11/msg00462.html
>> This modifies the unwind code so that it uses the test:
>>
>> + && get_frame_func (this_frame) == entry_point_address ()
>>
>> that that in place, the old inside_entry_func can be made static to
>> blockframe.c. This should reduce Kevin's patch to just doco + frame.c
>> tweaks.
>>
>> comments?
>
>
> Please re-read that discussion. Particularly:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-11/msg00459.html
>
> in which I asked you to leave the call to inside_entry_func and change
> its implementation. You asked for other legitimate uses of this
> function, and I gave you some.
Sorry, I'm lost. Right now, even without this patch, there is only one
call path to that function:
get_prev_frame
legacy_get_prev_frame
legacy_frame_chain_valid
inside_entry_func
It is there to prop up legacy code. Given this, I even considered
deleting it (or folding it into legacy_frame_chain_valid).
Do you want me to add a new separate static frame.c:inside_entry_func?
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-03 22:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-03 4:06 Andrew Cagney
2004-02-03 17:25 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-03 22:19 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-02-04 15:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-02-04 16:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-02-04 16:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=40201E5A.70605@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox