From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26413 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2008 00:01:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 26401 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2008 00:01:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:00:40 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45FB983AC; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 00:00:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E5C98329; Sun, 9 Mar 2008 00:00:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JY8xx-00017E-EK; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:00:37 -0500 Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:01:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Async mode fixes. Message-ID: <20080309000037.GA3935@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200803051027.29575.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <18385.48967.964309.898509@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <200803081158.40723.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <18386.63679.965070.279756@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080308205343.GA27235@caradoc.them.org> <18387.7279.827881.339251@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18387.7279.827881.339251@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-03/txt/msg00075.txt.bz2 On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 12:08:31PM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote: > > > My changes aren't just for Linux, but an exec target. I mean native > > > debugging (I think) with just one implementation - linux. It sounds like > > > I'm inflating what I've done but other native targets can presumably be > > > adapted to make use of the changes in inf-ptrace.c, exec.c etc. > > > > I think you mean "child" target? target exec just reads an exec file > > on disk. > > Well, my changes are in exec.c to exec_ops methods, not to target methods in > inf-child.c. Then ISTR these get inherited by target methods in inf-ptrace.c > > Are you saying that these changes should really be in inf-child.c or just that > I've misunderstood the concept of an exec target? An exec target is the bit that owns the executable file. Then other targets live on top of it (on the "target stack") - target remote, target sim, target child (which is just "run"). Putting things in the exec target and not overriding them in any other target means that they will work whenever there is an executable file, regardless of target, and not work if we are attached without an executable file. So if they go in exec.c, perhaps they shouldn't be in the target vector at all. Or perhaps they should be the default versions in target.c if no target overrides them (like default_region_ok_for_hw_watchpoint). -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery