From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3544 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2013 16:52:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 3451 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Feb 2013 16:52:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_STOCKGEN,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:52:26 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r17GqQ0Z025398 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:52:26 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r17GqOx1003423 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 7 Feb 2013 11:52:25 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [3/3] unconditionally call via SYMBOL_COMPUTED_OPS References: <871udlhzzb.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130207163233.GA15297@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20130207163233.GA15297@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Thu, 7 Feb 2013 17:32:33 +0100") Message-ID: <87a9rgvzg7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.92 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00183.txt.bz2 Jan> We could talk differently if SYMBOL_COMPUTED_OPS would apply for Jan> all LOC_*, the full virtualization. But that would require Jan> resolving first the inappropriate reuse of SYMBOL_COMPUTED_OPS for Jan> DW_AT_frame_base in function symbols. Jan> Without the full virtualization / unconditional calls via Jan> SYMBOL_COMPUTED_OPS I do not understand this patch and I am against Jan> it. I thought I had made this "has a frame-base" change, but I don't see it. WTF? You are right to oppose this now. I'll write the needed patch. If you're against the full virtualization plan, it would be nice to know now. IIUC this was the original point of all those FIXME comments. But if nobody wants it, we can just drop them directly. Tom