From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28478 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2006 21:18:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 28465 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2006 21:18:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:18:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 291D048CECB for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:18:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09726-01-7 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:18:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (s142-179-108-108.bc.hsia.telus.net [142.179.108.108]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA5548CECA for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 17:18:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 9E65D47E7F; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:18:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:18:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] problem fetching inferior memory due to breakpoint Message-ID: <20060426211817.GB930@adacore.com> References: <20060426190517.GA930@adacore.com> <20060426191946.GA28844@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060426191946.GA28844@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00347.txt.bz2 > Try safe_frame_unwind_memory, the other caller of > deprecated_read_memory_nobpt. Many other prologue analyzers already > seem to use that. Humpf, I must have been sleeping when I did my grep for this function as I should have seen that too. Do you think I should modify win32-nat to use that function or should I modify read_memory() to use safe_frame_unwind_memory(). I prefer the latter, because we also protect other platforms where this may happen too. -- Joel