From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA]: Use gdbarch for mn10300
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 19:23:00 -0000
Message-id: <npr8xz9s53.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
References: <20010504230002.33BBF5E9D5@zwingli.cygnus.com> <npae4sd14x.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com> <3AF6F3AE.5060700@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00109.html

I've applied this change, separated as you suggested.

Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:

> 
> > Oops.  This does have an effect on GDB's behavior: it changes
> > PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY to use pc_in_call_dummy_at_entry_point instead of
> > generic_pc_in_call_dummy.  I meant to remove that and re-submit it as
> > a separate change, but lost track of it.
> > 
> > Using pc_in_call_dummy_at_entry_point is a bug fix, getting rid of
> > around 200 test suite failures.
> 
> 
> Given I've stepped back from the mn10300, you're free to check in 
> changes as you create them.
> 
> 
> > I'm happy to re-segregate things if you like.  However, I'm under some
> > time pressure, so it would be a kindness to me to approve the patch as
> > is.
> 
> However, this still does need to be segregated.  Otherwise some poor 
> sole will end up having to extract the bug fix from the multi-arch changes.
> 
> 	Andrew
> 
> 
>