This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)

From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:43:04 -0600
Subject: Re: [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
References: <20120912180235.GA13250@host2.jankratochvil.net> <874nn13b8k.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120913223722.GA18571@adacore.com> <20120914080827.GB8584@host2.jankratochvil.net>

>> Perhaps you might want to hold off
>> on the branch, and observe the patch on the HEAD before porting it
>> to the branch? Just a suggestion, I don't mind either way.

Jan> Why not; but in reality I do not think the patch can make tail-call
Jan> frames behavior worse than it already is.

Fair point.

I think putting it on trunk and waiting isn't extremely likely to reveal
bugs.  I think you need a fairly specific setup to even encounter this
feature -- a recent gcc and builds with optimization enabled.

Tom

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
  - From: Joel Brobecker

References:
- [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
  - From: Jan Kratochvil
- Re: [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
  - From: Joel Brobecker
- Re: [patch+7.5?] Fix GDB-return into TAILCALL_FRAME (PR 14119)
  - From: Jan Kratochvil

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