From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32023 invoked by alias); 8 May 2012 05:21:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 32013 invoked by uid 22791); 8 May 2012 05:21:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Tue, 08 May 2012 05:21:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q485L97a001511 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 8 May 2012 01:21:09 -0400 Received: from psique ([10.3.112.12]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q485L4wt008229; Tue, 8 May 2012 01:21:06 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Joel Sherrill Cc: GDB Patches Subject: Re: Microblaze simulator - Fix missing prototype References: <4FA82F46.4080901@oarcorp.com> X-URL: http://www.redhat.com Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 05:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <4FA82F46.4080901@oarcorp.com> (Joel Sherrill's message of "Mon, 7 May 2012 15:23:34 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes 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/msg00207.txt.bz2 Hi Joel, Same comment from last e-mail: please send the patches to gdb-patches@sourceware.org. I am replying this e-mail to the appropriate list, with comments about your patch, but please send other patches to that list. On Monday, May 07 2012, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Without this patch, this generates a missing prototype > warning which is treated as an error. I don't see this > routine referenced elsewhere, so there is the possibility > that it also could be made static. The `_initialize*' routines are treated specially by the Makefile, when you build the project. They cannot be made static because they are called from another source file. Take a look at gdb/Makefile.in, and search for the rule `init.c:'. > OK to apply? Small nit below. > Index: gdb/microblaze-rom.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/microblaze-rom.c,v > retrieving revision 1.5 > diff -u -r1.5 microblaze-rom.c > --- gdb/microblaze-rom.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:06 -0000 1.5 > +++ gdb/microblaze-rom.c 7 May 2012 20:15:54 -0000 > @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ > #include "serial.h" > #include "regcache.h" > > +void _initialize_picobug_rom(void); There should be a space between the function name and the open paren. I am not a maintainer, but this change seems pretty trivial to me so that it can be committed without an explicit approval. Thanks, -- Sergio