This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Patch] arch recognition fix for osabi.c


I'm still not convinced.  I'm keeping your last message around until I
have a chance to examine what the compatible functions are really
doing.

On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:26:11AM -0400, Kris Warkentin wrote:
> Daniel, did you have any further spare brain cycles to consider my argument?
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Kris
> 
> > > > Changelog:
> > > >     * osabi.c (gdbarch_init_osabi): Just check arch for compatability
> > rather
> > > > identicality.
> > >
> > > Your mailer is eating indentation again...
> >
> > Yeah.  It's fine in the editor - it's the cut and paste to Outlook that
> > buggers it.
> >
> > > This half I'm not convinced by.  From our previous exchange I don't
> > > think you've fully justified it.  Not approved without more discussion.
> >
> > Okay.  Let's use mips as an example.  The 'compatible' check returns true
> if
> > they have the same arch (ie. bfd_arch_mips).  There will be many different
> > values for the arch_info pointer, all with bfd_arch_mips and various other
> > pieces of info such as which machine type (10k, 4300, etc.) of mips it is.
> > The handler was registered for bfd_arch_mips with no other information.
> In
> > the absence of the ABILITY to do anything smarter, we have to assume that
> if
> > the handler is for bfd_arch_mips, it should be run.
> >
> > As it stands, if the bfd reads a file and says 'this is a tx3900' or some
> > such, the pointers won't be the same and my backend init_abi won't be run
> > even though I want it to run for all mips targets.
> >
> > > >       (generic_elf_osabi_sniff_abi_tag_sections): Add check for QNX
> > Neutrino
> > > > binaries.
> > >
> > > This bit looks fine, except for two things: you've missed the coding
> > > standards by four space characters (before left parens), and your
> > > "safety first" check overruns the buffer (missing +1 in the alloca).
> >
> > Doh!  Not very safe was it?  Sorry about that.  Fixed.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Kris
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]