From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Enable x86 XML target descriptions
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:10:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100222161040.GD30100@caradoc.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6dc9ffc81002220757v5e9b48bdnba56a260f0f3c0a8@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 07:57:52AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 07:34:01AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> I just need to know if the inferior is 32bit or 64bit. Why shouldn't
> >> target_gdbarch be used? At this point, target_gdbarch should have
> >> the correct bfd cpu info. Is that correct?
> >
> > Not if, for instance, we did not find the executable.
>
> How do you debug if you can't find executable? I am not sure if
> you can get that far.
That's not the point. You can not rely on the gdbarch here. It
breaks the entire abstraction to circularly read the architecture
description from the architecture. Plus it will do the wrong thing if
the user gives the wrong executable, and this is our chance to get it
right.
Why can't you figure this out with ptrace? Isn't there a bit in
flags, or something like that? Or a way to get at the kernel's
TIF_IA32 flag?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-22 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-10 20:03 H.J. Lu
2010-02-17 14:59 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-17 15:23 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-17 15:42 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-17 15:46 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-17 16:19 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-18 5:44 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-18 15:37 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-18 23:01 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 13:42 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 14:17 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 15:01 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 15:27 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 15:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-22 15:39 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-28 20:30 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-28 20:58 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-28 22:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-22 14:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-22 15:34 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 15:52 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-22 15:58 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 16:10 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2010-02-22 16:58 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 17:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-22 19:52 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 21:06 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 21:31 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 21:41 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 22:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-22 22:07 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-22 22:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-22 22:21 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-28 20:12 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-02-22 21:04 ` H.J. Lu
2010-02-28 21:16 ` H.J. Lu
2010-03-01 14:49 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-03-01 17:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-03-01 17:09 ` H.J. Lu
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=20100222161040.GD30100@caradoc.them.org \
--to=dan@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
/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