This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] Re: read_register_bytes() bug; was my Regcache revamp
- To: ac131313 at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: [rfc] Re: read_register_bytes() bug; was my Regcache revamp
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
- Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 09:30:55 +0300
- CC: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <3B7EAF09.4010801@cygnus.com> <3B7ED838.70607@cygnus.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:03:52 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
>
> > I think the ``real bug'' is that the updated read_register_bytes() can
> > leave part of the buffer undefined. I'm thinking of either changing
> > things to:
> >
> > o initializing the gaps from
> > the regcache (restoring old
> > behavour)
>
>
> The attached patch implements this. Thoughts?
Frankly, for quite some time I'm confused by the RFC's and RFA's
posted here. Are they all meant to go to the branch as well as the
trunk? If so, is it wise to make such changes after cutting the
release branch?
Perhaps in the future each patch could tell explicitly whether it is
meant ffor the branch or not, to prevent confusion.