From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1580 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2003 04:09:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1570 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2003 04:09:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (65.49.0.121) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Dec 2003 04:09:52 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A462B90; Tue, 2 Dec 2003 23:09:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FCD620C.9040102@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 04:09:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Roland McGrath Subject: Re: [rfa/threads] Convert thread event descriptors to code addrs References: <200311252300.hAPN016N015872@magilla.sf.frob.com> <3FC3E83E.6090805@redhat.com> <20031126042653.GA4448@nevyn.them.org> <3FC4E2C6.7060102@redhat.com> <20031201160145.GA21094@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 >> (remote_check_symbols?) Wouldn't that be equivalent to my original >> patch (wrong side of libthread_db)? I suspect you want to add something >> to gdbserver (or just wait for Roland's updated libthread_db). > > > Any remote client asking for a function address is going to want to put > a breakpoint there, I would have guessed. Thus we should return the > breakpointable address. Suggest re-reading roland's comments. The contract is to convert a symbol "foo" to its value. Not convert a symbol foo to a code address by doing a descriptor re-direction. > Hum, maybe there is some use in having the descriptor... let me think > about it. This should go into the remote protocol doco one way or the > other. I think the protocol is pretty clear here. Andrew