This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH, v4] PR 20569, segv in follow_exec

On 10/25/2016 01:30 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
On 10/25/2016 01:20 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
On 10/25/2016 07:15 PM, Luis Machado wrote:

Before i go ahead and adjust this even more, what's your plan and ETA
for the above?

I'll try to post this today.

Sounds good.

This is disturbing more code as we try to consolidade
slightly different functions into a single one in order to make things a
bit more clean. But i'm afraid this is besides the point of the original
patch itself?

I just want to understand what's the end goal, because the scope seems
to be changing slightly with each iteration. :-)

No, the scope has not changed at all.  Your original version duplicated
a large chunk of code, and then the attempt to refactor things did it
incorrectly.  Still the same scope, but the patch as is, is buggy.

Between accepted duplicated code, and fixing the patch, I take the

Fine by me.


Going back to the flags problem, maybe adding "add_flags" as argument to symbol_file_add_main_1, just like symbol_file_add, and appending those flags to the existing flag variable there would make things work?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]