From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-34928-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 20387 invoked by alias); 10 Jul 2009 14:46:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 20374 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jul 2009 14:46:04 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f228.google.com) (209.85.219.228)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:45:58 +0000
Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so946109ewy.24         for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.11.72 with SMTP id 50mr573126wew.64.1247237155783; Fri, 10  	Jul 2009 07:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6dc9ffc80907100740j3ba8add6p11645087ef694b4f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <m3d489ljw4.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 	 <6dc9ffc80907100740j3ba8add6p11645087ef694b4f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:46:00 -0000
Message-ID: <6dc9ffc80907100745o4c1fcd7br8d96deb9bdf16309@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFA: re-merge dwarf2.h with src
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: tromey@redhat.com, Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>, GDB <gdb@sourceware.org>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00069.txt.bz2

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:40 AM, H.J. Lu<hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Tom Tromey<tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
>> There was a recent commit to the src copy of dwarf2.h.
>> This patch pulls it over to the gcc repository.
>>
>> Ok?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> 2009-07-09 =A0Jakub Jelinek =A0<jakub@redhat.com>
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0* dwarf2.h (enum dwarf_location_atom): Add DW_OP_implicit=
_value
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0and DW_OP_stack_value.
>
> Do we need both dwarf2.h and elf/dwarf2.h? Shouldn't we remove elf/dwarf2h
> or just include ../dwarf2.h?
>
>

I checked in this patch.  Tested binutils on Linux/ia32 and Linux/Intel64.

2009-07-10  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

        * dwarf2.h: Just include ../dwarf2.h.


--=20
H.J.