Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Danny Backx <danny.backx@scarlet.be>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Patch : gdbserver get_image_name on CE
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:41:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1246473648.15871.201.camel@pavilion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200906302258.00604.pedro@codesourcery.com>

On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 22:58 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 June 2009 22:07:19, Danny Backx wrote:
> > 
> > > Is the rest of my patch acceptable or are there things I need to
> > > address ?
> > >
> 
> Did you get to confirm what really that ERROR_PIPE_NOT_CONNECTED
> is about?
> 
>  http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00373.html

I am certain that this happens when you create an executable which
attempts to get an API from a DLL by name, if the API happens not to be
in the DLL.

You'll probably need to read that five times to understand it :-)

If the development environment is wrong in this way :
- a .def file was used to create a .dll.a file
- the .def file implements an api that's not actually in the DLL

This could be due to 
- an invalid .def file
- a .def file that's valid for one distribution of WinCE but not for
  another (read: differences between CE versions)

Anyway. What happens is the executable appears to start (CreateProcess
returns valid results), then the loader kicks in and fails. This is
where I have verified that you will get this result. 

Furthermore : none of the debug API's work either, gdbserver really gets
not a single sensible signal from the underlying process.

> Could you post an updated, cleaned up patch, without any extra
> unnecessary bits removed, along with change log entry, using
> 'cvs diff -up'?

Will do.

> And you never did explain what was broken with get_image_name
> that you had to fix, as I asked $n emails ago, right?

Err. I am almost certain that the return value of GetProcessMemory isn't
a reliable way to verify success. Its final parameter is. Or at least
that is my experience. Of course, MSDN docs don't mention this.

I tested this on ARM and on i386. Real devices, not emulators. The ARM
implementation worked as it was, and continued to work after my fix. The
i386 version didn't work before, does work after the fix.

Is this sufficient explanation?

	Danny

-- 
Danny Backx ; danny.backx - at - scarlet.be ; http://danny.backx.info


  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-01 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-13 14:29 Danny Backx
2009-06-13 18:05 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-13 18:08   ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-14  8:35     ` Danny Backx
2009-06-14 13:56       ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-14  8:47   ` Danny Backx
2009-06-14  9:48     ` Danny Backx
2009-06-14 14:23       ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-21  9:50         ` Danny Backx
2009-06-30 21:07           ` Danny Backx
2009-06-30 21:56             ` Pedro Alves
2009-07-01 18:41               ` Danny Backx [this message]
2009-07-01 18:52                 ` Pedro Alves
2009-07-01 19:12                   ` Danny Backx
2009-07-01 20:12                 ` Pedro Alves
2009-07-04 18:14                   ` Pedro Alves
2009-07-08  9:55                     ` Danny Backx
2009-07-08 11:34                       ` Danny Backx
2009-07-27 20:40                         ` Danny Backx
2009-07-01 19:31               ` Danny Backx
2009-06-14 14:34       ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-14 14:05     ` Pedro Alves
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-06-07  9:18 Danny Backx
2009-06-07 17:03 ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-07 18:02   ` Danny Backx
2009-06-07 18:15     ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-07 19:13       ` Danny Backx
2009-06-07 19:28         ` Pedro Alves
2009-06-08 18:13           ` Danny Backx
2009-06-12 22:18       ` Danny Backx
2009-06-13  6:28         ` Johnny Willemsen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1246473648.15871.201.camel@pavilion \
    --to=danny.backx@scarlet.be \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox