From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8664 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2014 01:38:37 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 8652 invoked by uid 89); 4 Mar 2014 01:38:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 01:38:35 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1WKeJT-0000NF-U5 from Yao_Qi@mentor.com for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 17:38:31 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.96.206]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:38:31 -0800 Received: from qiyao.dyndns.org (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-02.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.96.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:38:31 -0800 Message-ID: <53152E0B.9090107@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 01:38:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hui Zhu CC: gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [OB PATCH] target.h (to_traceframe_info): Fix TARGET_DEFAULT_RETURN References: <530CBCED.3000200@mentor.com> <53152341.8060501@codesourcery.com> <531529CB.2020400@mentor.com> In-Reply-To: <531529CB.2020400@mentor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-03/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 On 03/04/2014 09:18 AM, Hui Zhu wrote: > I cannot understand about this OB is not right. I have 2 questions to you: > 1. Before my patch, does target-delegates.c that generated by make-target-delegates is same with current target-delegates.c? No, as I said, I forgot to re-generate target-delegates.c. > 2. Does this new target-delegates.c that generated by make-target-delegates can be built success? No, we should use TARGET_DEFAULT_NORETURN instead of TARGET_DEFAULT_RETURN, which is a mistake when I resolved conflicts. struct traceframe_info *(*to_traceframe_info) (struct target_ops *) TARGET_DEFAULT_NORETURN (tcomplain ()); -- Yao (齐尧)