From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23718 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2009 21:17:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 23709 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Feb 2009 21:17:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:17:15 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A32110AD6; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:17:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D48510A42; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:17:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LUp7Q-0001r7-4c; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:17:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand Subject: Re: [3/2] Inspect extra signal information, handle amd64 bi-arch gdb Message-ID: <20090204211712.GA6816@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand References: <200902031501.49657.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090204002438.GA29944@caradoc.them.org> <200902040049.10820.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200902042102.10900.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200902042102.10900.pedro@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2009-02/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 09:02:10PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: > Here's a patch that applies on top of the other two. I think > it's easy to read it split out from the other patches. > > This handles the layout conversion for x86/amd64, near the > PTRACE_[G|S]ETSIGINFO calls, like we discussed yesterday. > > I'm not adjusting gdbserver here yet, since the original series > added $_siginfo support for ARM, and x86/amd64 only, and, gdbserver > on x86/amd64 isn't biarch aware yet. We can handle doing something > like this there when we add $_siginfo gdbarch type support for ppc, or > when we add biarch support for x86/amd64. > > What do you think? I've tried to make it as pretty as I could. :-) Seems fine to me. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery