From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15064 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2013 12:11:51 -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 15047 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2013 12:11:51 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received: from e28smtp03.in.ibm.com (HELO e28smtp03.in.ibm.com) (122.248.162.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:11:30 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp03.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:34:01 +0530 Received: from d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (9.184.220.126) by e28smtp03.in.ibm.com (192.168.1.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:33:59 +0530 Received: from d28relay05.in.ibm.com (d28relay05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.62]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11E93E004F for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:41:44 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av06.in.ibm.com (d28av06.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.48]) by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r7CCBKuk46858292 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:41:20 +0530 Received: from d28av06.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av06.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r7CCBND4028919 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:41:23 +0530 Received: from d23ml188.in.ibm.com (d23ml188.in.ibm.com [9.182.8.144]) by d28av06.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id r7CCBNjD028916; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:41:23 +0530 In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc64-aix ptrace64 when defined. X-KeepSent: 91B6D42F:B0CFCB9C-65257BC5:004284AA; type=4; name=$KeepSent To: David Edelsohn Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Mark Kettenis , Ulrich Weigand Message-ID: From: Raunaq 12 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:11:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-TM-AS-MML: No X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 13081212-3864-0000-0000-0000098C445E X-SW-Source: 2013-08/txt/msg00298.txt.bz2 [ sending again without the line wrapping that makes it so hard to read] David Edelsohn wrote on 08/09/2013 09:23:42 PM: > From: David Edelsohn > To: Raunaq 12/India/IBM@IBMIN, Mark Kettenis , U= lrich Weigand > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > Date: 08/09/2013 09:22 PM > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] powerpc64-aix ptrace64 when defined. > > > When GDB is compiled in 64 BIT mode ptrace and ptracex calls are not de= fined on AIX. > > So, instead we check if ptrace64 is defined, if it is then we call that= instead of ptrace/x. > > Have you tested the patch in both 32 bit mode and 64 bit mode for both ho= st GDB and target > debugee? Yes, ran the tests in testsuite/gdb.base and any new failures did not arise= when >I tried the earlier version of this patch from last year and experienced p= roblems > debugging in 32 bit mode (I no longer could debug GCC). The earlier version of this patch was using ptrace64 only if BFD64 was defi= ned, i.e. when GDB was built in 64 BIT mode. Did you build 32 bit gdb? If so, according to the previous version of this patch, no ptrace related calls were changed as ptrace64 was only called if BFD64 was defined. Could you please resend the error you got whil= e debugging 32 bit GCC to my mail id? I can look into it to see where the problem is co= ming from. > ptrace, ptracex and ptrace64 are defined in syscalls.exp. > > ptrace64=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 syscall3264 > # 32 > ptrace=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 syscall32 > ptracex=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 syscall32 > As you wrote, ptrace and ptracex are 32 bit only API; ptrace64 is availab= le as 32 bit and 64 bit > API. ptrace64 is suppose to support 32 bit debugee targets, but I experie= nced problems. > > ptrace64 will be discovered as supported by configure when building 32 bi= t GDB. > Is your intention to always use ptrace64 when it is available or only to = use it for GDB hosted on > 64 bit mode? My initial intention was to use ptrace64 only if ptrace64 was available and GDB was built in 64 BIT. But after a few discussions over this, I decided to use ptrace64 when ever the API is defined. So, this present patch would use ptrace64 even for a 32 bit build as you rightly noticed. This did not change the test results for a 32 bit build of GDB. Thanks, Raunaq M. Bathija