This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB 7.0 regressions: s390(x)-linux, ppc(64)-linux, spu-elf
I was going to reply again to your initial email, going through each
patch one by one, but since I already commented on some of the patches
directly on gdb-patches, I'll reply to this message instead.
> - Put in the patches that are testsuite-only (7, 8, 9 in my list)
> They should be harmless and significantly clean up test suite
> results on some platforms
Yeah, I agree.
> - Put in the solely platform-specific patches (3, 5, 6)
> I've tested these, and they definitely help on those platforms
3. Displaced stepping missing on S/390
This one seems safe. At worst, non-stop would still be broken...
5. PIE detection not enabled on PowerPC and S/390
I suggested we pass on this one because it's just a missing warning.
But it only affects the targets that you know much better than
I do, so I'll trust your judgement on this one.
6. SPU gdbserver regressions when killing inferior
Agreed that it would be nice to have it for 7.0.
> - The bitfield regression (1) seems a serious error affecting
> multiple platforms that really should be fixed, and the patch
> seems straightforward ...
I think it's OK to put this in 7.0 as well. Daniel reviewed
your patch, so that's two pairs of eyes.
> - The displaced stepping regression is unfortunate, as it completely
> breaks a new feature. The patch *should* affect only PowerPC, but
> it does need to touch generic files (infrun.c), so there's always
> some risk. In any case, I'd prefer to get at least some feedback
> before putting it in ...
This one seems a little more problematic indeed. Is that a regression
compared to 6.8? If it is, perhaps we could try to get it fixed for
7.0.1 instead?
> - The Obj-C changes are not really a regression, so it may not really
> be critical to put those in. On the other hand, they just touch
> Obj-C code (except for one PowerPC-specific bugfix), and they
> drastically improve the situation on PowerPC-64, so it would be
> nice ... Again, I'd definitely like some feedback first.
Given the severity of the problem (SEGV), I think we should put your
patch in 7.0.
--
Joel