From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 84031 invoked by alias); 2 Feb 2016 10:31:41 -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 84012 invoked by uid 89); 2 Feb 2016 10:31:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= 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; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:31:40 +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 EDCBC461E2; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 10:31:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u12AVaUe003869; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 05:31:37 -0500 Message-ID: <56B08588.3080307@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 10:31:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Walfred Tedeschi , eliz@gnu.org, brobecker@adacore.com CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 4/5] Adaptation of siginfo fixup for the new bnd fields References: <1453474456-13169-1-git-send-email-walfred.tedeschi@intel.com> <1453474456-13169-5-git-send-email-walfred.tedeschi@intel.com> <56AA0B6F.4070102@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <56AA0B6F.4070102@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2 (Moving your reply to this here, so we can keep this topic's conversation properly threaded.) Walfred Tedeschi wrote: On 01/28/2016 12:37 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 01/22/2016 02:54 PM, Walfred Tedeschi wrote: > >> Caveat: No support for MPX on x32. > > What would it take to support that? > About your question on x32 and MPX. > MPX does not support 32bit pointers in 64bit mode. Ok, so IIUC, it's not a GDB limitation, or a limitation of this patch set. It's really that x32 can't support MPX at all. Correct? Thanks, Pedro Alves