From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4539 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2015 10:17:29 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 4530 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jun 2015 10:17:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:17:28 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED61D8E779; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:17:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t5AAHPRd010560; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 06:17:25 -0400 Message-ID: <55780EB4.1070003@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:17:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi , Taimoor CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Improving GDB's mechanism to check if function is GC'ed References: <556DB1BB.50601@codesourcery.com> <86eglkeyfw.fsf@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86eglkeyfw.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2 On 06/10/2015 09:53 AM, Yao Qi wrote: > If the problem only exists on Nucleus, I am afraid I don't agree with > accepting this change, because GDB doesn't support Nucleus. Sorry. Hmm, does it really need to, though? We expose mechanisms like add-symbol-file, xml library list with qXfer:libraries:read (the default solib provider), xml target descriptions, "info os", etc., exactly so that GDB doesn't have to learn about the myriad of random RTOS's out there. That said, I don't really understand the patch. How can you have real code at address 0, but then _not_ have address 0 covered by a section? Thanks, Pedro Alves