From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12280 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2003 15:43:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12268 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2003 15:43:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2003 15:43:59 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1AChd0-0003uK-50; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:43:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:43:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] New (!) BFD target Message-ID: <20031023154358.GA6151@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3F9725D2.3000102@redhat.com> <20031023024105.GB2637@nevyn.them.org> <3F97625F.3060900@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F97625F.3060900@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00694.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 01:08:47AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >Also, how does this interact with the "exec" target, whose > >functionality it seems to duplicate in some ways? There should be an > >exec target down the stack somewhere, why aren't you using that? > > bfd-target.h is "new" and "re-entrant". "exec.c" is "old" and "very > very non-re-entrant". Recall that I wrote: > > >What you're casually dismissing as trivial: "Not everywhere will need to > >be converted" and "Eventually, with low urgency, the non-ops should be > >moved out of it" are exactly the things I also need *now*. > > The change I posted, for svr4-solib.o, requires two active bfd-backed > targets (the executable and ld.so), and hence re-entrency[sp]. > > Follow on changes can see "corefile.c" and "exec.c" both overhauled to > use this new bfd-target foundation/parent object. OK, as commonized code between corefile and exec handling this makes a bit more sense to me. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer