From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17997 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2009 07:00:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 17765 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Apr 2009 07:00:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 07:00:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA4332BAC3E; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:00:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 73IKky074H+B; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:00:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5AF22BAC3D; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:00:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 685AFF5BA6; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 07:09:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: schwab@linux-m68k.org Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: obsolete comment in m68klinux-nat.c... Message-ID: <20090416070008.GH7603@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg00134.txt.bz2 Andreas, We're trying to cleanup a bit the ARI output, and one of the macros that was deprecated and now is no longer used (FETCH_INFERIOR_REGISTERS) is only mentioned in a comment inside m68klinux-nat.c. /* FIXME: This duplicates code from `inptrace.c'. The problem is that we define FETCH_INFERIOR_REGISTERS since we want to use our own versions of {fetch,store}_inferior_registers that use the GETREGS request. This means that the code in `infptrace.c' is #ifdef'd out. But we need to fall back on that code when GDB is running on top of a kernel that doesn't support the GETREGS request. */ I can see that the duplication is still there, but I think that things might have changed quite a bit since the FIXME was written. It looks like you are maintaining GDB on that platform, so I was wondering if you could take a look at the comment and maybe update it a bit? Thank you! -- Joel