From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-24726-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 32148 invoked by alias); 30 May 2003 18:26:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 32042 invoked from network); 30 May 2003 18:26:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.212)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 May 2003 18:26:47 -0000
Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2])
	by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h4UIQkfm000591;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 20:26:46 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org)
Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h4UIQkaU019758;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 20:26:46 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost)
	by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6/Submit) id h4UIQj9Y019755;
	Fri, 30 May 2003 20:26:45 +0200 (CEST)
To: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] alpha frame unwind tweakage
References: <20030530064425.GA20401@twiddle.net>
From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 18:26:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: Richard Henderson's message of "Thu, 29 May 2003 23:44:25 -0700"
Message-ID: <867k88cmu2.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>
X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00569.txt.bz2

Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> writes:

> Two, I was a bit deluded with the hackery surrounding calling
> back into the heuristic unwinder for mdebug frames that were
> still in the prologue.  Mainly, if find_proc_desc can find the
> PDR for a function, so can get_pc_function_start.  And the 
> later works with far more than just mdebug.  This seems to 
> work slightly better when dealing with executables that don't
> contiain debug info, but do have their symbol table.
> 
> Ok?

I'm always in favour of patches that remove code :-), so yes please,
go ahead.  However, could you make the loop incremente patch a
seperate commit?

Mark