Re: [PATCH v3 00/17] Catch syscall group

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 05/04/2015 03:33 AM, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:

> Strace maintains static tables holding syscall names, numbers and group
> information for each architecture separately.
> 
> My script parsed those tables and mapped the syscall names in GDB's xmls
> to the group information from strace.
> 
>> If there are grouping differences between the architectures (other
>> than which syscalls are wired/supported), Gabriel will have noticed
>> them, but that knowledge is lost (not encoded anywhere) in the
>> current form.
> 
> I didn't see any difference in group allocation for the same syscall in
> different architectures.  So this shouldn't be an issue.
> 
> Pedro made two suggestions on how to proceed: (1) keep the information
> in a xml file and teach GDB about it or generate the full xml file
> during the build; (2) keep the group information inside a tabular text
> file and use a simple text substitution to generate the full xml during
> the build.
> 
> Personally, even though I'm not a big fan of the XML format in general,
> I dislike option (2) because inserting a tabular text file now feels a
> little clumsy.  since we already use XML for syscalls, I think syscall
> groups should be stored similarly.
> 
> I plan to send a new version later this week (as soon as I have a break
> From college) that implements Pedro's first suggestion.  Now, we keep
> the information inside linux-defaults.xml and have a XSL script to
> performs a join of the information and generate the full XML file.

Sounds great.  Thanks!

Thanks,
Pedro Alves