From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11257 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2009 17:34:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 11245 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Apr 2009 17:34:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:34:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3AHW5O2007072; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:32:05 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3AHW6DL019057; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:32:06 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-12-19.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.19]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3AHW33c021942; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:32:04 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id D0018378196; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:32:01 -0600 (MDT) To: Jonas Maebe Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Set calling convention of methods References: From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:34:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Jonas Maebe's message of "Mon\, 6 Apr 2009 21\:51\:00 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00196.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jonas" == Jonas Maebe writes: Jonas> In attachment is my patch to set the calling convention for methods. Do you have a copyright assignment on file? Jonas> Since the calling convention cannot be defined using stabs, I've Jonas> hardcoded "0" there (which means that nothing changes compared to the Jonas> past). Maybe that should rather be some constant? If so, where should Jonas> it be defined? Yeah, this is a bit gross. AFAICT the calling convention field only takes values from dwarf. So, I suppose the question is how you plan to use this information in later patches. If you check the calling convention in general code then I suppose we will need some generic set of values here. Other than this issue, this looks reasonable to me. Tom