This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [00/19] Eliminate some more current_gdbarch uses
- From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:57:58 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [00/19] Eliminate some more current_gdbarch uses
> this series of patches makes some more progress towards the goal of
> eliminating the current_gdbarch global. This series tackles remaining
> instances that are relatively simple to eliminate using existing
> mechanism and relatively "local" changes.
>
> While some patches in the series do change existing interfaces to
> allow passing architecture information to some lower level, these
> are typically less-frequently used ones that require only limited
> changes to the rest of GDB.
>
> After this patch series, the remaining instances of current_gdbarch
> are difficult to eliminate, typically within frequently-called
> central infrastructure routines. A follow-on patch series will
> address those remaining occurrences.
>
> This patch series was tested with no regressions on amd64-linux,
> powerpc64-linux, spu-elf, s390-ibm-linux, and s390x-ibm-linux.
> Also, I made sure an --enable-targets=all build still succeeds.
>
> Comments welcome! I plan on committing the series within a week
> or two (after I'm back from the GCC Summit).
I've now checked this series in, with the exception of:
[03/19] set_longjmp_breakpoint
(I'm still rewriting this as discussed.)
and
[16/19] address class support
(We're still discussing whether a type should always be associated
with an architecture; if so, this patch is no longer needed.)
Bye,
Ulrich
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com