From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3211 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2010 15:15:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 3153 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jun 2010 15:15:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate2.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate2.de.ibm.com) (195.212.17.162) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:14:57 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate2.de.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o5OFEsPA025031 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:14:54 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o5OFEsXH1474604 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:14:54 +0200 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id o5OFEsRO021922 for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:14:54 +0200 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with SMTP id o5OFEqvt021907; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:14:52 +0200 Message-Id: <201006241514.o5OFEqvt021907@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:14:52 +0200 Subject: Re: New ARI warning Wed Jun 23 01:54:57 UTC 2010 To: dan@codesourcery.com (Daniel Jacobowitz) Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:15:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20100624145616.GA31306@caradoc.them.org> from "Daniel Jacobowitz" at Jun 24, 2010 10:56:19 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2010-06/txt/msg00529.txt.bz2 Dan Jacobowitz: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 01:54:57AM +0000, GDB Administrator wrote: > > 493a494,495 > > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:543: deprecate: read_memory: Replace read_memory() with regcache_read() et.al. > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:543: read_memory (from, buf, len); > > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:557: deprecate: write_memory: Replace write_memory() with regcache_read() et.al. > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:557: write_memory (to, buf, len); > > Am I missing something here? Why would you replace read_memory with > regcache_read? The ARI claims "read_memory" and "write_memory" as "to be deprecated" interfaces. These were added by Andrew Cagney 2003-05-24: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-05/msg00341.html at about the time he introduced get_frame_memory: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2003-06/msg00104.html The idea seems to have been that all memory access was supposed to identify the process/thread/target where the memory resided by means of passing a frame. However, this was never really fully pursues, it seems. I'm not really sure it still makes sense to keep these ARI entries ... Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com