From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16121 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2004 22:46:10 -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 16114 invoked from network); 29 Apr 2004 22:46:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2004 22:46:09 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3TMk9KI024421 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:46:09 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3TMk8v08163; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:46:08 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A38A2B9D; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:46:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <409185B1.50001@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 22:46:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Cc: Joel Brobecker Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Use frame_type for sigtramp test in infrun.c References: <200403292338.BAA16799@faui1d.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <406DD226.1080104@gnu.org> <20040403000855.GF871@gnat.com> <406E0CEA.7040906@gnu.org> <20040406014818.GN871@gnat.com> In-Reply-To: <20040406014818.GN871@gnat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00695.txt.bz2 > Andrew, I've bitten the bullet and committed this. As Joel observes, failures are revealing latent bugs. Andrew >>>> >Just to make sure we're talking about the same patch, attached is the >>>> >patch I was working on (may need to be updated to the current sources). >>>> >Is that what you were refering to? >> >>> >>> Yes, but no longer worry about the if(legacy_frame_p) path. > > > I have tested the attached patch on several platforms, and as expected, > found a few regression here and there. I started analyzing the > regressions on hp/ux, but this takes time, and I have to do something > else for a while. A quick glance doesn't say much about the source of > regressions, but my feeling after the few ones that I analyzed is that > they are a consequence of a latent bug somewhere else more than a > problem with the patch itself. The fact that we have no regression on > both x86-linux and sparc-solaris is also encouraging. > > Below is a quick summary of the difference in the testsuite results > before and after the patch. It sounded like this patch would make your > life much easier. I'll let you and the other maintainers decide whether > it's acceptable to include this patch now, as a small step backward to > allow you to jump farther.