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 3/4] Consistently use fprintf_filtered when displaying MIPS registers.


On Thursday, April 27, 2017 05:05:33 PM Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 04/13/2017 05:29 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
> > On 04/12/2017 01:37 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> One line was using printf_filtered instead of fprintf_filtered
> >> to the requested file.
> >>
> >> gdb/ChangeLog:
> >>
> >>     * mips-tdep.c (print_gp_register_row): Replace printf_filtered
> >>     with fprintf_filtered.
> >> ---
> >>  gdb/ChangeLog   | 5 +++++
> >>  gdb/mips-tdep.c | 2 +-
> >>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog
> >> index 73d24d2c9d..f1ac925fec 100644
> >> --- a/gdb/ChangeLog
> >> +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
> >> @@ -1,5 +1,10 @@
> >>  2017-04-11  John Baldwin  <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
> >>
> >> +    * mips-tdep.c (print_gp_register_row): Replace printf_filtered
> >> +    with fprintf_filtered.
> >> +
> >> +2017-04-11  John Baldwin  <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
> >> +
> >>      * mips-fbsd-tdep.c (MIPS_PC_REGNUM): Remove.
> >>      (MIPS_FP0_REGNUM): Remove.
> >>      (MIPS_FSR_REGNUM): Remove.
> >> diff --git a/gdb/mips-tdep.c b/gdb/mips-tdep.c
> >> index 41cb9d82c6..674b5098b0 100644
> >> --- a/gdb/mips-tdep.c
> >> +++ b/gdb/mips-tdep.c
> >> @@ -6539,7 +6539,7 @@ print_gp_register_row (struct ui_file *file,
> >> struct frame_info *frame,
> >>        for (byte = 0;
> >>         byte < (mips_abi_regsize (gdbarch)
> >>             - register_size (gdbarch, regnum)); byte++)
> >> -    printf_filtered ("  ");
> >> +    fprintf_filtered (file, "  ");
> >>        /* Now print the register value in hex, endian order.  */
> >>        if (gdbarch_byte_order (gdbarch) == BFD_ENDIAN_BIG)
> >>      for (byte =
> >>
> > 
> > This one seems trivial enough. I have no comments.
> 
> Agreed.  This one's obviously correct.  Please push it in.

Pushed.  I know we are still discussing patch 4, but are patches 1 and
2 in the V2 series ok to go in?  I believe I addressed Luis' earlier
feedback on those two patches.

-- 
John Baldwin


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