Re: [PATCH] auxv support via xfer_partial, for core files and /proc

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 02:06:42PM -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Roland, FYI, there is already this patch:
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-11/msg00204.html
> 
> Thanks for the pointer.  I have some comments below comparing the two patches.
> 
> > What you should definitly do is add yourself to the write-after-approval 
> > list (don't forget to the ChangeLog and to post the committed change).
> 
> Done.
> 
> 
> Here are the notable differences between the two patches.
> 
> 
> 1. My patch includes the changes affecting gcore:
> 
> 	* procfs.c (procfs_make_note_section): If we can read
> 	TARGET_OBJECT_AUXV data, add an NT_AUXV note containing it.
> 	* linux-proc.c (linux_make_note_section): Likewise.
> 
>    This is not something your patch tries to address.  I think we want those
>    changes regardless of the implementation details for TARGET_OBJECT_AUXV.

This could be an independent patch, couldn't it?  In the interest of
progress, you may wish to submit it separately.  Of course it would
have to come after rather than before... so maybe not.

> 5. Your implementation uses pread unconditionally.  Mine doesn't bother to
>    use pread even when it's available, and just uses lseek + read.  Full
>    portability, including things like older glibcs running on newer
>    kernels, requires using configure tests for pread.  I did not bother
>    with that because in the real-world case, there will just be one read
>    from offset 0 and so lseek won't even be called, just open+read+close.

The configury is already there, FYI.  Grep for HAVE_PREAD64 in linux-proc.c.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer