[RFC/RFA] new gdbarch method: NAME_OF_MALLOC

[Andrew Cagney]

> Following the disussion around the fact that the name of the function
> used to allocate some memory in the inferior is hard-coded to "malloc"
> (http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-09/msg00079.html),
> here is a proposed addition to the architecture vector.
> 
> Is it the right thing to do to handle the interix case where the
> malloc function should be "_malloc"? Is "NAME_OF_MALLOC" ok, or would
> we prefer a different name?

[No one appears to have come up with a better name :-)]

> Also, I did not find much documentation on each field for the line I
> added in gdbarch.sh. So I kind of reversed engineered it by reading
> the script code. So if you find anything I missed, this might explain
> it...
> 
> 2002-09-12  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@gnat.com>
> 
>         * gdbarch.sh (NAME_OF_MALLOC): New variable in the architecture
>         vector. Will be useful for Interix.
>         * gdbarch.h, gdbarch.c: Regenerate.
> 
>         * valops.c (value_allocate_space_in_inferior): Replace hard-coded
>         name of the malloc function by NAME_OF_MALLOC.
> 
> Ok to apply?

> Index: gdbarch.sh
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbarch.sh,v
> retrieving revision 1.159
> diff -c -3 -p -r1.159 gdbarch.sh
> *** gdbarch.sh	6 Sep 2002 20:17:40 -0000	1.159
> --- gdbarch.sh	12 Sep 2002 19:57:06 -0000
> *************** m::CONSTRUCT_INFERIOR_ARGUMENTS:char *:c
> *** 660,665 ****
> --- 660,666 ----
>   F:2:DWARF2_BUILD_FRAME_INFO:void:dwarf2_build_frame_info:struct objfile *objfile:objfile:::0
>   f:2:ELF_MAKE_MSYMBOL_SPECIAL:void:elf_make_msymbol_special:asymbol *sym, struct minimal_symbol *msym:sym, msym:::default_elf_make_msymbol_special::0
>   f:2:COFF_MAKE_MSYMBOL_SPECIAL:void:coff_make_msymbol_special:int val, struct minimal_symbol *msym:val, msym:::default_coff_make_msymbol_special::0
> + v::NAME_OF_MALLOC:char *:name_of_malloc::::"malloc":"malloc"::0

Can ``const char *'' be used?  I think you'll just need to tweak the 
function signature for find_function_in_inferior().  If you need to 
tweak more, yell! :-)

doc/gdbint.texinfo will need a separate patch.

Andrew