This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: PING 3: [patch, testsuite] General ARM target triplet
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:26:49 +0000
- Subject: Re: PING 3: [patch, testsuite] General ARM target triplet
- References: <4CF91BD4.7090708@codesourcery.com> <201012131407.08185.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4D063BA8.4000404@codesourcery.com> <201012131539.22392.pedro@codesourcery.com> <4D25CD5E.4030204@codesourcery.com> <4D2EE641.1080902@codesourcery.com> <4D370C8E.8010307@codesourcery.com>
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 09:08 -0700, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 01/13/2011 04:47 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> > On 01/06/2011 08:10 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> >> On 12/13/2010 11:39 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> >>>>> OK, I combine them together in one single patch this time.
> >>> Thanks. If/when everyone's happy with the triplet bits
> >>> proper, this is okay.
> >>
> >> Ping. Are you happy with this triplet? :-)
> >>
> >> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-12/msg00187.html
> >>
> >
> > Ping.
> >
>
> Ping again with a small fix pointed out by Matthew. Richard, are you OK
> with that?
>
> --
> Yao Qi
+proc dwarf2_support {} {
+ if {![istarget *-*-linux*]
+ && ![istarget *-*-gnu*]
+ && ![istarget *-*-elf*]
+ && ![istarget *-*-openbsd*]
+ && ![istarget arm*-*-eabi*]
+ && ![istarget arm*-*-symbianelf*]
+ && ![istarget powerpc-*-eabi*]} {
+ return 0
+ }
+
+ return 1
+}
Why is this negated? It would seem more sensible to me to have a list
of supported targets that returns 1 and then default to returning 0 for
everything else. Why? Because then if the list gets too long its
easier to add a second cluster in an independent if-clause.
The ARM bits are all fine. The dwarf2 changes look generally sensible,
but should be reviewed by a full gdb maintainer, which I'm not.
R.