From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10112 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2013 10:01:07 -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 10097 invoked by uid 89); 11 Nov 2013 10:01:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,GARBLED_BODY,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-we0-f170.google.com Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-we0-f170.google.com) (74.125.82.170) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:01:05 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id u57so4427853wes.1 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 02:00:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.73.9 with SMTP id h9mr5828258wiv.26.1384164056031; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 02:00:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.79.194 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 02:00:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5280A8CA.3040307@codesourcery.com> References: <5268865F.6060307@codesourcery.com> <527C5887.8070304@linaro.org> <5280A8CA.3040307@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:08:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] GDB process record and reverse debugging improvements for arm*-linux* From: oza Pawandeep To: Yao Qi Cc: Omair Javaid , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Patch Tracking Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00282.txt.bz2 Hi Omair, Can you please quickly point me out to the patches, I will start reviewing form my end. I am sorry if I have missed your patches sometime before, and I afraid I dont have them now. I have a link to your patches. I could find only one... if you could send all the patches, I shall be able to give my feedback. Regards, Oza. On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 11/08/2013 11:20 AM, Omair Javaid wrote: >> >> 2013-11-08 Omair Javaid >> >> * arm-linux-tdep.c (struct arm_linux_record_tdep): Declare. >> (arm_canonicalize_syscall): New function. >> (arm_all_but_pc_registers_record): New function. >> (arm_linux_syscall_record): New function. >> (arm_linux_init_abi): Add syscall recording constructs. >> * arm-tdep.c (thumb_record_ldm_stm_swi): Update thumb syscall >> decoding. >> (arm_record_coproc_data_proc): Update arm syscall decoding. >> * arm-tdep.h (gdbarch_tdep): Update arm_syscall_record >> declaration. >> > > We can write the last entry like this: > > * arm-tdep.h (struct gdbarch_tdep) : Remove. > : New field. > >> >> +#include "record-full.h" >> +#include "linux-record.h" >> + > > > We should mention these two inclusions in ChangeLog too, like > > * arm-linux-tdep.c: Include "record-full.h" and > "linux-record.h". > >> #include "cli/cli-utils.h" >> #include "stap-probe.h" >> #include "parser-defs.h" >> @@ -1231,6 +1234,98 @@ arm_stap_parse_special_token (struct gdb >> return 1; >> } >> >> +/* ARM process record-replay constructs; syscall, signal etc. */ >> + >> +struct linux_record_tdep arm_linux_record_tdep; >> + >> +/* arm_canonicalize_syscall maps from the native arm Linux set >> + of syscall ids into a canonical set of syscall ids used by >> + process record. */ >> + >> +static enum gdb_syscall >> +arm_canonicalize_syscall (int syscall) >> +{ >> + enum { sys_process_vm_writev =3D 377 }; >> + >> + if (syscall <=3D gdb_sys_sched_getaffinity) >> + { >> + return syscall; >> + } > > > Unnecessary braces. > >> + else if (syscall >=3D 243 && syscall <=3D 247 ) >> + { >> + return syscall + 2; >> + } >> + else if (syscall >=3D 248 && syscall <=3D 253 ) >> + { >> + return syscall + 4; >> + } >> + >> + return -1; >> +} > > >> + >> +/* Handler for arm system call instruction and recording. */ >> + >> +static int >> +arm_linux_syscall_record (struct regcache *regcache, unsigned long >> svc_number) > > > Your mailer should wrap your patch. That means other people can't apply > your patch cleanly. > > Patch looks good to me but you still need a maintainer's approval. > > -- > Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)