Re: [rfc] [0/8] Get rid of current_gdbarch

[Maxim Grigoriev <maxim@tensilica.com>]

>> I've checked in all of those except:
>>
>> - the xtensa-tdep.c patch (to give Maxim a chance to comment), and

I've tested xtensa-tdep.* patch. It works fine.

Getting rid of defines looks somewhat less elegant. But, I think it's 
been done for a reason.

Please, go ahead and check it in.

Thanks much for doing this.

-- Maxim


Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Markus Deuling wrote:
>
>   
>> this is the next series of 8 mostly mechnical patches to get rid of of some trivial to replace occurences of current_gdbarch. 
>>     
>
> I've checked in all of those except:
>
> - the xtensa-tdep.c patch (to give Maxim a chance to comment), and
> - the stack.c patch, because of this:
>
> @@ -1854,10 +1856,11 @@ If you continue, the return value that y
>    if (return_value != NULL)
>      {
>        struct type *return_type = value_type (return_value);
> -      gdb_assert (gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type,
> +      gdb_assert (gdbarch_return_value (get_frame_arch (get_current_frame ()),
> +					return_type,
>  					NULL, NULL, NULL)
>  		  == RETURN_VALUE_REGISTER_CONVENTION);
> -      gdbarch_return_value (current_gdbarch, return_type,
> +      gdbarch_return_value (get_frame_arch (get_current_frame ()), return_type,
>  			    get_current_regcache (), NULL /*read*/,
>  			    value_contents (return_value) /*write*/);
>      }
>
> At this point, there's no need to involve get_current_frame.  The
> routine operates on the current regcache, and should simply consult
> its architecture.
>
> Thanks,
> Ulrich
>
>