From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10488 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2012 13:55:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 10478 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Apr 2012 13:55:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:55:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3ODtbx1011007 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:55:37 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3ODtZjM007724; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:55:36 -0400 Message-ID: <4F96B0D7.4040506@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:13:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove board setting `gdb,cannot_call_functions' References: <1335177254-5616-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <1335177254-5616-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00774.txt.bz2 On 04/23/2012 11:34 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > Hi, > When documenting all exiting board settings we are using, > `gdb,cannot_call_functions' is interesting to me. What does > `gdb,cannot_call_functions' mean? Can't do inf-call? Yes. >From upstream DejaGNU's baseboards: >grep cannot_call_functions * -C 1 arm-ice.exp-# Can't call functions from GDB. arm-ice.exp:set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 arm-ice.exp- -- moxie-sim.exp-set_board_info gdb,noresults 1 moxie-sim.exp:set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 moxie-sim.exp-set_board_info gdb,skip_float_tests 1 -- powerpcle-sim.exp-# Can't call functions from GDB. powerpcle-sim.exp:set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 -- powerpc-sim.exp-# Can't call functions from GDB. powerpc-sim.exp:# set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 -- sh-hms.exp-# And it can't call functions. sh-hms.exp:set_board_info gdb,cannot_call_functions 1 sh-hms.exp- The powerpc-sim ones could still be relevant, and tested, I suppose. It could be the reason that functions couldn't (or can't) be called with these targets was related to the target backend, not the tdep code in gdb. Or, this might useful while still developing a new port. E.g., moxie is a new-ish port, where Anthony Green added that "gdb,cannot_call_functions" as recently as 2010: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/dejagnu/2010-01/msg00000.html Of course, that might have been blind copy&paste. I think that even if we removed the support, we should still minimally document the variable though... If we add something like this in the future, we'd want to reuse the old name. But if this isn't getting in the way... > It is quite impossible that someone is still setting > `gdb,cannot_call_functions' in his/her board file, I assume. However, > I might be wrong. -- Pedro Alves