On 08/08/2011 09:31 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On Monday 08 August 2011 03:46:29, Yao Qi wrote: >> @@ -1182,6 +1197,7 @@ static const struct qxfer qxfer_packets[] = >> { "statictrace", handle_qxfer_statictrace }, >> { "threads", handle_qxfer_threads }, >> { "traceframe-info", handle_qxfer_traceframe_info }, >> + { "fdpic", handle_qxfer_fdpic}, > > Please keep the list alpha sorted. > OK. Fixed. >> + memcpy (myaddr, ((char *)data) + offset, copy_length); > > memcpy (myaddr, (char *) data + offset, copy_length); > >> @@ -5112,6 +5172,11 @@ static struct target_ops linux_target_ops = { >> NULL, >> #endif >> linux_core_of_thread, >> +#if defined PT_GETDSBT >> + linux_read_loadmap, >> +#else >> + NULL, >> +#endif >> linux_process_qsupported, >> linux_supports_tracepoints, >> linux_read_pc, > > Looks like you may be breaking all !tic6x ports. Either > put the new method at the end, or update all > struct target_ops instances to adjust for the new field. > There are five instances of target_ops in gdbserver, they are in linux-low.c, lynx-low.c, nto-low.c, spu-low.c, and win32-low.c. Adding new field linux_read_loadmap has only affect on target_ops instance in win32-low.c. The rest instances are too short to reach field linux_read_loadmap and fields after it. Updated target_ops instance in win32-low.c. > Otherwise, with Mark's comments addressed, this looks > fine to me. > I take Mark's choice #2 on the macro of PTRACE_GETDSBT. PTRACE_GETDSBT is replaced with PT_GETDSBT in new patch. I leave PTRACE_GETDSBT_EXEC and PTRACE_GETDSBT_INTERP there, because they are macros and no PT_* counterparts defined in headers. > Is there any patch in the series missing review? > The last bit is about test case patch, [RFA 7/8] New port: TI C6x: test case fixes http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-07/msg00682.html > Please take care to apply the patches in a sequence > where none breaks the build, to avoid breaking bisects. > Thanks for reminding this. I'll take care of it. -- Yao (齐尧)