From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26046 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2003 21:23:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26036 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2003 21:23:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2003 21:23:04 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9NLN3M22712 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:23:03 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9NLN3r04791 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:23:03 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-2.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.2]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h9NLN0cY032589; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:23:01 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h9NLMtA01335; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:22:55 -0700 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:23:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1031023212255.ZM1334@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney "Re: [rfa:ppc64] Use target in convert_from_func_ptr_addr" (Oct 23, 5:02pm) References: <3F9730C3.1040308@redhat.com> <1031023160017.ZM13795@localhost.localdomain> <3F980124.6050409@redhat.com> <1031023171155.ZM14125@localhost.localdomain> <3F9841E0.5080700@redhat.com> To: Andrew Cagney , Kevin Buettner Subject: Re: [rfa:ppc64] Use target in convert_from_func_ptr_addr Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00706.txt.bz2 On Oct 23, 5:02pm, Andrew Cagney wrote: > If you want I can add a wrapper method, reducing the actual change to > just the modification of: > > - return read_memory_unsigned_integer (addr, 8); > > to: > > + return get_target_memory_unsigned (targ, addr, 8); That'd be great. (With this change, consider it approved.) > > Yes. But what does this buy us? I.e, what will we be able to do after > > this patch that we couldn't do before? > > The ability to apply this architecture method to an arbitrary target > instance? Sorry, but I'm afraid that I'm missing something in your > question. I'm trying to understand where you're going with these changes. Do you anticipate that this architecture method will ever be called with anything other than current_target? If so, then under what circumstances? Will a GDB user see enhanced functionality as a result? Kevin