From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23870 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2008 13:34:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 23837 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Nov 2008 13:34:42 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from igw2.br.ibm.com (HELO igw2.br.ibm.com) (32.104.18.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:33:55 +0000 Received: from d24relay01.br.ibm.com (unknown [9.8.31.16]) by igw2.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A07F717F501 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 11:32:23 -0200 (BRDT) Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (d24av02.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.47]) by d24relay01.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id mA5DXVPN3105002 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:33:31 -0300 Received: from d24av02.br.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mA5DXpNR023050 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 11:33:52 -0200 Received: from [9.8.9.146] ([9.8.9.146]) by d24av02.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id mA5DXpcx023021; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 11:33:51 -0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] 'catch syscall' feature -- Architecture-independent part From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Durigan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FAnior?= To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , bauerman@br.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: References: <1225773079.24532.52.camel@miki> <1225836687.20764.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20081104223421.GC5391@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:34:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1225892021.32321.58.camel@miki> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: 2008-11/txt/msg00078.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 06:18 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I'd like us very much to have some higher-level abstraction of a > syscall in target-independent code, than just a number. Can we do > that, please? I'm sorry about my bad design assumptions, but that just sounded good for me by the time I was developing. I think we can do the higher-level abstraction that you are asking, but I'd like you to please describe in more details how this abstraction would be, or even better, if that's not asking too much you could take the code I did and implement something better :-). I'm sorry about these assumptions I've made, again. Regards, -- Sérgio Durigan Júnior Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer Linux Technology Center - LTC IBM Brazil