Re: [commit] Prefer xfer_partial for memory xfers

[Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>]

> On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 12:27:50PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>>> +   NOTE: cagney/2004-09-30:
>>> +
>>> +   The old code tried to use four separate mechanisms for mapping an
>>> +   object:offset:len tuple onto an inferior and its address space: the
>>> +   target stack; the inferior's TO_SECTIONS; solib's SO_LIST;
>>> +   overlays.
>>> +
>>> +   This is stupid.
>>> +
>>> +   The code below is instead using a single mechanism (currently
>>> +   strata).  If that mechanism proves insufficient then re-factor it
>>> +   implementing another singluar mechanism (for instance, a generic
>>> +   object:annex onto inferior:object:annex say).  */

> Does this mean that a bunch of new code would have to be written to
> make this compatible with overlays?  How about solibs?

I tested on PPC/NetBSD and it showed no regressions so the solib case is 
definitly covered (and as the note implies, there's serious level of 
redundancy in the current "design").

Andrew