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] New GDB target iq2000


On Mar  7 09:03, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 11:08:35AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Mar  5 15:20, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:17:45PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > Yup.  Although the lower-limit for first-line breakpoints may cause
> > > > bogus parameter values to be printed.  I consider that less a problem
> > > > than my program unexpectedly running to completion though.  The
> > > > problem is that some people tend to think differently and we never
> > > > reached consensus about it.
> > > 
> > > Well, it makes sense to me.  It's clear that the FRV and submitted
> > > iq2000 ports have different heuristics for these two cases; it would be
> > > good to cover both of them in common code.
> > 
> > This is rather getting a generic discussion to me.  What about the
> > iq2000 port itself?  Does it make sense to defer iq2000 until after
> > the generic problem has been solved?
> 
> No, it doesn't.  Did you see the patch I sent you on Friday night?

I've tried it and it has two FAILs more than the original version of
iq2000_skip_prologue, the two break.exp FAILs we already know:

  (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/break.exp: breakpoint small function, optimized file
  (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/break.exp: run until breakpoint set at small function, optimized file


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat, Inc.


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