Re: SIGSEGV on gdb 6.7*

[Michael Snyder <msnyder at specifix dot com>]

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 19:26 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 02:54:47PM -0800, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > That said -- I agree with Daniel.  I can see where 
> > flushing the register cache and flushing the frame cache
> > are two things that should probably always be done at
> > the same time -- but I'm worried about the extra overhead
> > that this patch introduces.  We call registers_changed
> > A LOT, and in doing so we assume that it has a very
> > low overhead.
> 
> If the registers have changed, how can the frame cache still possibly
> be valid?

No argument -- it can't.

Are you swinging around toward wanting to accept this patch?
;-)