Re: RFC: libunwind-frame.c -vs- optimized-out

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:

Jan> Yes, it also seems to me so.  Your change is an incoremental improvement.

Jan> If there are no regressions approving the check-in.

I will commit it shortly.

I compared this patch against the test results from a revision before
the optimized-out changes.  I had to do this by hand because in the
meantime there were a lot of test suite changes.

(And as an aside, our test suite is still very noisy: we have a lot of
tests named "set print sevenbit-strings", among other things.)

I also compared to HEAD.  Here the patch fixes a lot of regressions.
According to gcc/contrib/compare_tests it also causes:

gdb.mi/mi2-break.exp: list of breakpoints
gdb.mi/mi-break.exp: list of breakpoints
gdb.mi/mi-nonstop.exp: check varobj, w1, 1

... but all of these are duplicate test names and I think the script is
confused about PASS -vs- XFAIL.

(Also the last test there is probably misnamed.)

Tom