From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3714 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2004 06:23:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3701 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2004 06:23:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO monty-python.gnu.org) (199.232.76.173) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Feb 2004 06:23:57 -0000 Received: from [207.232.27.5] (helo=WST0054) by monty-python.gnu.org with asmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AqRJJ-00077d-U7; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:23:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 06:23:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20040210025527.GA16979@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:55:27 -0500) Subject: Re: [RFA]: Patch for ia64-tdep.c to cross-compile Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <40282283.4090904@redhat.com> <20040210025527.GA16979@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00229.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:55:27 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > 2004-02-09 Jeff Johnston > > > > * ia64-tdep.c (ia64_frame_this_id): Fix tracing print statement > > to use paddr functions to format ia64 addresses and long values.. > > (ia64_frame_prev_register, ia64_sigtramp_frame_this_id): Ditto. > > (ia64_sigtramp_frame_prev_register, ia64_access_reg): Ditto. > > (get_kernel_table, ia64_find_proc_info_x): Ditto. > > (ia64_get_dyn_info_list, ia64_libunwind_this_frame_id): Ditto. > > (ia64_libunwind_frame_prev_register, ia64_unwind_dummy_id): Ditto. > > > > I think this patch is "obvious" If this is an obvious patch, shouldn't we have some coding rule somewhere to cover it? It certainly isn't obvious out of the GDB context, i.e. not a standard coding practice.