From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29756 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2015 11:59:18 -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 29669 invoked by uid 89); 11 Dec 2015 11:59:17 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:59:16 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33B9EC0C0F82; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:59:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tBBBxDjZ030304; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 06:59:14 -0500 Message-ID: <566ABA91.5000508@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:59:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi , Antoine Tremblay CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/8] Use xml-syscall to compare syscall numbers in arm_linux_sigreturn_return-addr. References: <1449583641-18156-1-git-send-email-antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> <1449583641-18156-4-git-send-email-antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> <86io45ql3x.fsf@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86io45ql3x.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-12/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 On 12/11/2015 11:29 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > Antoine Tremblay writes: > >> It also adds a new function to xml-syscall.h/c to compare syscalls numbers >> called is_syscall. > > Why don't we use existing get_syscall_by_name in > arm_linux_sigreturn_return_addr rather than adding a new function is_syscall? > I wonder whether going through xml is really best. E.g., writing a syscall call by name as a string is more typo prone than a macro constant. If you typo the string, you get a runtime error. If you typo a macro you get a compile time error. You could fix that by adding macros like: #define ARM_SIGRETURN_NAME "sigreturn" but then you might as well just do: #define ARM_SIGRETURN 119 and avoid the xml look up. Syscall numbers are ABI, they can't ever change. Thanks, Pedro Alves