From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21317 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2009 22:18:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 21308 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jun 2009 22:18:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_55,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sif.is.scarlet.be (HELO sif.is.scarlet.be) (193.74.71.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:18:12 +0000 Received: from [172.17.1.10] (ip-81-11-222-7.dsl.scarlet.be [81.11.222.7]) by sif.is.scarlet.be (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n5CMHtpR018882; Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:17:56 +0200 Subject: Re: Patch : gdbserver get_image_name on CE From: Danny Backx Reply-To: danny.backx@scarlet.be To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <200906071916.03048.pedro@codesourcery.com> References: <1244366297.11918.210.camel@pavilion> <200906071804.37208.pedro@codesourcery.com> <1244397699.11918.216.camel@pavilion> <200906071916.03048.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:18:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1244845085.11918.283.camel@pavilion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DCC-scarlet.be-Metrics: sif 20001; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00345.txt.bz2 On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 19:16 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Sunday 07 June 2009 19:01:39, Danny Backx wrote: > > > Feel free to ignore these patches until they're complete, if that is a > > better idea. > > It's fine to send unfinished patches for comments, if you'd like, but > please say so explicitly, so I don't waste time trying to understand > what they're for, for nothing. > > > I sent this one separately because it looked contained. > > Thanks for doing that. Splitting self contained patches is > always good. Excellent news : I just figured out why gdbserver was failing on CE/x86 where the same code worked for ARM. The GetThreadContext call looked different between win32-i386-low.c and its ARM equivalent : th->context.ContextFlags = CONTEXT_FULL | CONTEXT_FLOATING_POINT | CONTEXT_EXTENDED_REGISTERS | CONTEXT_DEBUG_REGISTERS; GetThreadContext (th->h, &th->context); On ARM, only CONTEXT_FULL and CONTEXT_FLOATING_POINT were used. The call on x86 returned error 87 (ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER) but MSDN doesn't contain clues as to what that means. I'll try to figure out whether this breaks anything, but at first sight this small change (and a couple of others I have yet to submit) makes gdbserver work. Danny -- Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info