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: [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address

From: Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at ges dot redhat dot com>
Cc: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 16:01:44 -0700
Subject: Re: [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address
Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
References: <3D644ACA.3626BF8F@redhat.com> <1020826223151.ZM32716@localhost.localdomain> <3D6AB26F.10003@ges.redhat.com>

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> > On Aug 21,  7:22pm, Michael Snyder wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Kevin, would you by any chance be in a position to test it on ia64
> >> and/or
> >> rs6000?
> >
> >
> > Sure, I'll give it a spin...
> 
> Just FYI, given the thread:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-08/msg00674.html
> I'm assuming that this patch is dropped.

Why?  I didn't drop it.  You commented that using generic dummy
frames was a better solution, but it remains true that some
targets do not use generic dummy frames, and I'm not sure that
all targets can use them.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address
  - From: Andrew Cagney

References:
- [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address
  - From: Michael Snyder
- Re: [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address
  - From: Kevin Buettner
- Re: [RFA] Generic solution for store_struct_address
  - From: Andrew Cagney

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