From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12722 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2008 19:36:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 12544 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Dec 2008 19:35:54 -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/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:35:10 +0000 Received: from d24relay01.br.ibm.com (unknown [9.8.31.16]) by igw2.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDF117F4F8 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 16:18:19 -0200 (BRDT) Received: from d24av01.br.ibm.com (d24av01.br.ibm.com [9.18.232.46]) by d24relay01.br.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id mB9KYeAI3723326 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:34:40 -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 mB9JZ66K026267 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:35:06 -0200 Received: from [9.8.13.181] ([9.8.13.181]) by d24av01.br.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id mB9JZ6vp026241 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:35:06 -0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] catch syscall -- try 3 -- Introduction From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio?= Durigan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FAnior?= To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <1227568560.18828.0.camel@miki> References: <1226987110.5454.31.camel@miki> <1227568560.18828.0.camel@miki> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 19:36:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1228851299.1697.0.camel@miki> Mime-Version: 1.0 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: 2008-12/txt/msg00174.txt.bz2 Hi, Ping again. Thanks. On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 21:16 -0200, Sérgio Durigan Júnior wrote: > Hello guys, > > Ping. :-) > > []s > > On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 03:45 -0200, Sérgio Durigan Júnior wrote: > > Hi, it's me again :-) > > > > This is the third attempt to push this patch upstream :-). I've > > basically reworked everything that you asked me, so I think things are > > pretty much better now. Basically, the changes are: > > > > - Incremented the documentation (as suggested by Eli) > > > > - Fixed some bugs > > > > - Now you can catch as many syscalls as you want in one single command > > (thanks to Tom Tromey!) > > > > - Create a "linux-tdep.[ch]", and put the common syscall functions there > > (suggestion by Daniel Jacobowits) > > > > - Put the syscall_state inside lwp_info (as requested by Pedro) > > > > ... and other minor changes. Unfortunately (only for Eli, apparently), I > > decided to keep the mechanism the way it is, so you'll still find > > syscalls being stored as numbers in this version of the patch. That's > > not personal; I only thought that people in general were happy with the > > way I did. > > > > It's also good to mention that the support for x86_64 arch is almost > > done (I have one little regression to solve). That's for you, Phil ;-). > > > > Ok, I'm tired (3:30am here) so I won't write too much. I'd appreciate > > your review :-). > > > > Thanks, > > -- Sérgio Durigan Júnior Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer Linux Technology Center - LTC IBM Brazil