This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 5/8] Use BLOCK_ENTRY_PC in place of most uses of BLOCK_START
- From: Simon Marchi <simon dot marchi at ericsson dot com>
- To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>, <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 22:21:46 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] Use BLOCK_ENTRY_PC in place of most uses of BLOCK_START
- References: <20180625233239.49dc52ea@pinnacle.lan> <20180625235145.3cbf43ff@pinnacle.lan>
On 2018-06-26 02:51 AM, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> This change/patch substitues BLOCK_ENTRY_PC for BLOCK_START in
> places where BLOCK_START is used to obtain the address at which
> execution should enter the block. Since blocks can now contain
> non-contiguous ranges, the BLOCK_START - which is still be the
> very lowest address in the block - might not be the same as
> BLOCK_ENTRY_PC.
>
> There is a change to infrun.c which is less obvious and less mechanical.
> I'm posting it as a separate patch.
Hi Kevin,
I haven't "gotten" yet when we want to use BLOCK_START and when we want
to use BLOCK_ENTRY_PC. I understand the difference between them, but
don't quite understand how to know which is the one we want. It might
become clearer as I keep reading. I trust you know what you are doing
anyway, so I assume the patch is good :).
Simon