This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] Eliminate write_register from solib-sunos.c
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: uweigand at de dot ibm dot com
- Cc: drow at false dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 23:22:50 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [rfc] Eliminate write_register from solib-sunos.c
- References: <200706151658.l5FGwTK3017869@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:58:29 +0200 (CEST)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand" <email@example.com>
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 20:53:46 +0200 (CEST)
> > > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > >
> > > Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >
> > > > There are some a.out BSD targets that use solib-sunos.o. In
> > > > particular OpenBSD/m68k still uses it. Interestingly enough, that
> > > > target sets DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK to 2. I'll fire up my Quadra 800 and
> > > > investigate somewhere later this week.
> > >
> > > Did you get around to investigate this?
> > I started things but didn't finish. And now I've forgotten what
> > exactly it was that needed to be tested :(. Can you refresh my mind?
> The question was whether that "if (DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK)" block in
> solib-sunos.c was in fact correct, or whether is should be removed.
> As Dan suggested, I've in the meantime investigated that issue on
> i386-openbsd3.3 under qemu, and found out that this block *is*
> correct, because the breakpoint that is hit here was not actually
> installed by GDB, but by the dynamic loader itself:
> So, if that's OK with you, I'd like to commit my original patch
> that leaves the "if (DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK)" block in, and simply
> replaces the write_register call with write_pc. I've now tested
> that patch on my i386-openbsd3.3 setup with no regressions.
Fine with me.