Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com
Cc: uweigand@de.ibm.com, drow@false.org, tromey@redhat.com,
	        gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200907071843.n67IhIdV005570@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090707182203.GA24153@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (message 	from Jan Kratochvil on Tue, 7 Jul 2009 20:22:04 +0200)

> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 20:22:04 +0200
> From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> 
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:59:43 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > But then I don't understand Jan's diff at all.  Linux has its own
> > implementation for TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY in linux-nat.c.  Why isn't
> > that one used?
> 
> Expecting the same problem must affect even non-Linux ptrace usage.  I will
> move it to linux-nat.c if you think so.

I suppose I should have been more specific.  You are trying to fix a
bug that you see on Linux isn't it?

And this fix should only be relevant for TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY isn't
it?

But Linux has its own implementation for doing TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY
xfers in linux_proc_xfer_partial.

So I don't understand how this change fixes anything on Linux.

Can you enlighten me here?


  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-07 18:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-29 10:27 Jan Kratochvil
2009-04-29 19:05 ` Mark Kettenis
2009-04-29 20:29   ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-04-29 20:45     ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-06-25 16:33     ` Tom Tromey
2009-07-06  8:19       ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-07-07 16:24         ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-07 16:54           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-07-07 18:00           ` Mark Kettenis
2009-07-07 18:22             ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-07-07 18:43               ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2009-07-08 13:20           ` [patch] /* */ for target_thread_architecture [Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64] Jan Kratochvil
2009-07-09 12:51             ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-09 16:36               ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-07-08 14:42         ` [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64 Jan Kratochvil
2009-07-13 18:10           ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-13 19:42             ` Mark Kettenis
2009-07-13 20:32             ` Jan Kratochvil

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200907071843.n67IhIdV005570@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
    --to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=tromey@redhat.com \
    --cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox