From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31915 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2010 18:07:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 31906 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Aug 2010 18:07:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:07:19 +0000 Received: from mailhost3.vmware.com (mailhost3.vmware.com [10.16.27.45]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 602CAB00B; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com (promd-2s-dhcp138.eng.vmware.com [10.20.124.138]) by mailhost3.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55CABCD95D; Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C740A55.8090804@vmware.com> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:07:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100702) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: "teawater@gmail.com" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [Doc]tracepoint: change *$esp@300 to *(unsigned char *)$esp@300 References: <83d3t8ogi4.fsf@gnu.org> <834oekndh9.fsf@gnu.org> <4C7402E6.90704@vmware.com> <83zkwbnb50.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <83zkwbnb50.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2010-08/txt/msg00421.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:35:34 -0700 >> From: Michael Snyder >> CC: Hui Zhu , >> "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" >> >> Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>>> From: Hui Zhu >>>> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:30:03 +0800 >>>> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org >>>> >>>> If "unsigned char" is too big, what about *(char *)$esp@300? >>> "char" is better, but not because of the length. >>> >>> However, what I really meant is to ask whether *$esp should indeed >>> refuse to work, or is that a bug? >> I imagine it must have worked at one time... > > If we-all think now that it's okay for *$esp not to work, then let's > fix the docs and be done. I think the reason it doesn't work now is that it's typed as a void pointer. (gdb) pt $esp type = void * Probably it used to be typed as a char * or something.