From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27189 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2007 15:34:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 27178 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2007 15:34:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw1.br.ibm.com (HELO igw1.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.24) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:34:28 +0000 Received: from mailhub3.br.ibm.com (mailhub3 [9.18.232.110]) by igw1.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA7D014800A for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:16:25 -0300 (BRT) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.46]) by mailhub3.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l8AFYL701544406 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:34:22 -0300 Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l8AFYJoq032603 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:34:19 -0300 Received: from [9.18.238.24] ([9.18.238.24]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l8AFYEvk032469; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:34:19 -0300 Subject: Re: [patch 0/1] Threaded Watchpoints From: Luis Machado Reply-To: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20070910002103.GA25048@caradoc.them.org> References: <1187013078.4346.9.camel@localhost> <1187631217.11176.8.camel@localhost> <1187631568.11176.11.camel@localhost> <20070905020350.GA10025@caradoc.them.org> <1188995481.4879.5.camel@localhost> <20070910002103.GA25048@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:34:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1189438454.4318.9.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-09/txt/msg00136.txt.bz2 > Here is my current patch. The PowerPC bits are totally untested, > not even compiled - could you test it for me, please? I don't > have a suitable system. Sure, i'll do the tests as soon as i get the code to compile. > I've regression tested i386, amd64, and ia64. I tested S/390 by hand > and it works, but the extra logic in watchthreads.exp for that > platform hasn't been tested (no DejaGNU or expect on my test system). I couldn't build the code for ppc due to a call to the "save_siginfo" function. Why is exactly that function's been moved to "linux-nat.c"? It seems that it's being called only in that file, and with a PPC-specific ptrace request "PTRACE_GETSIGINFO", which is not declared anywhere except for "ppc-linux-nat.c". Could you please clarify this specific point? Thanks! Regards, -- Luis Machado IBM Linux Technology Center e-mail: luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com