From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14136 invoked by alias); 5 May 2009 19:32:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 14108 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2009 19:32:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 May 2009 19:32:23 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n45JW88m018155; Tue, 5 May 2009 21:32:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n45JW8Xk001860; Tue, 5 May 2009 21:32:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 19:32:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200905051932.n45JW8Xk001860@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: eliz@gnu.org CC: teawater@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <83ab5re5mz.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Tue, 05 May 2009 22:01:08 +0300) Subject: Re: Process record and replay checked in to main trunk References: <83ws91c5sp.fsf@gnu.org> <83prepdss5.fsf@gnu.org> <83ab5re5mz.fsf@gnu.org> 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: 2009-05/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2 > > Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 21:39:50 +0800 > > From: Hui Zhu > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 19:14, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 21:54:19 +0800 > > >> From: Hui Zhu > > >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > >> > > > Right, but I was asking about another _x86_ target, not just any > > > target.  Is there anything an i386 target needs to do to get process > > > record and replay work, except define suitable i386_intx80_record and > > > i386_sysenter_record functions? > > > > Yes, if they use sysenter or intx80 to be syscall. They need set > > these function pointers with themselves. > > If some os use another insn to be syscall. the prec in i386-tdep need > > update to support interface for it. > > But if the i386_intx80_record and i386_sysenter_record are > Linux-specific interfaces, why they are visible in i386-tdep.c, which > is supposed to be common to all i386 targets? As far as I know all open source Unix-like operating systems implement systemcalls using int0x80 amd/or syscall.