From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7920 invoked by alias); 17 May 2012 19:26:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 7912 invoked by uid 22791); 17 May 2012 19:26:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 May 2012 19:26:22 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1SV6L7-00045Z-6Q from Maciej_Rozycki@mentor.com ; Thu, 17 May 2012 12:26:21 -0700 Received: from SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([137.202.0.104]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 17 May 2012 12:26:04 -0700 Received: from [172.30.0.201] (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 17 May 2012 20:26:19 +0100 Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 19:26:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Joel Brobecker CC: Subject: Re: [RFA/commit] procfs.c: Remove unused functions and make many functions static In-Reply-To: <20120517173453.GF10253@adacore.com> Message-ID: References: <1336000479-30511-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <20120517173453.GF10253@adacore.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00664.txt.bz2 On Thu, 17 May 2012, Joel Brobecker wrote: > Maciej asked: > > Hmm, here's a dumb question as a followup, following a situation I've > > just experienced -- can this stuff be needed by anything external on > > Solaris, similarly to some functions pulled from GDB by libthread_db.so.1 > > from glibc? > > Sorry for the delay in answering this. I just couldn't find the time > to look at it. No worries, understood, I do pipeline stuff too and put aside less important bits when I have to. > I think we will be fine. Usually, implicit callbacks have a specific > name that ties them to the external shared library that needs those > callbacks, and the fact that the name of the functions being deleted > start with the same prefix as the others is a little indicative that > the odds of them being an implicit callback are small. Regardless, > I did a little bit of research, and found that, AFAICT, this file > is only used on sparc/x86/amd64-solaris, mips-irix¬ and alpha-tru64. > I looked at the extra source files needed by these platforms, and > none of them indicated that we would open a shared library that might > call one of these functions. Just for kicks, I tested the patch on > sparc-solaris using AdaCore's testsuite. Thanks for doing this extra work; actually I hoped we had someone onboard with enough experience with this stuff to know the answer offhand. I didn't intend to put you on this long route, sorry about that. Maciej