This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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] |
Hi! On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:51:58 +0100, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:32:06 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:06:02 +0100, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:57:11 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > > > Can there be other semantic differences between the two? > > > > > > It is a good question and I am not aware of any such differences. > > > > Hmm, I just had a quick look, and found that, for example, tc-arm.c has > > this: > > > > #ifdef OBJ_ELF > > { "word", s_arm_elf_cons, 4 }, > > { "long", s_arm_elf_cons, 4 }, > > > > ... and obj-elf.c: > > > > {"4byte", cons, 4}, > > > > Compared to cons, s_arm_elf_cons does quite a lot of things, for example > > handle mapping symbols (which cons doesn't do, I think?). > > It does not seem to be needed for these testcases, they still PASS on: > armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf > (I did not verify if they still FAIL->PASS by their specific fixes.) I still have some reservations about this patch, but I won't hold it up having now now tested that it doesn't change the test results for sh-linux-gnu cross-testing -- SH also differentiates between using sh_elf_cons for .long/.int/etc. vs. s_uacons for .2byte/.4byte/.8byte. GrÃÃe, Thomas
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |