From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14161 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2005 05:07:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 14063 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Dec 2005 05:07:15 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (HELO ausmtp04.au.ibm.com) (202.81.18.152) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 05:07:14 +0000 Received: from sd0112e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh903.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.201]) by ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jBA5Ab2N111614 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:10:37 +1100 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.242]) by sd0112e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.8) with ESMTP id jBA5ACor180910 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:10:13 +1100 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jBA579P2000656 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:07:09 +1100 Received: from [9.181.133.252] ([9.181.133.252]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id jBA577c1000636; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:07:08 +1100 Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:39:00 -0000 From: Wu Zhou To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl Subject: Re: [RFC] GDB patches for hw watchpoints - revised In-Reply-To: <20051210044752.GA30979@nevyn.them.org> Message-ID: References: <20051206202848.GA9568@nevyn.them.org> <20051209050132.GA5325@nevyn.them.org> <20051210044752.GA30979@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-12/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 12:46:36PM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > > > No, let's get it right the first time. rwatch is extremely valuable, > > > and it sounds like you're having to play with ABI changes to get it to > > > work. > > > > OK. I will try to make it right the first time. :-) > > > > And can you elaborate on the statement that I am having to play with ABI > > changes to get it to work? It seems that you must find something > > noticeable, right? If so, please point out. Thanks. > > I was just talking about Anton's kernel patch. If you're still > changing the kernel to make it work, it's not quite done yet. Sorry. I am not sure what you means by playing with ABI changes. I had thought that you mean the changes in GDB's side. But it seems that you are meaning the changes in kernel's side. And yes, Anton give me a patch to assign the faulting data address to siginfo.si_addr. But in my opinion, it is a small patch. Just that I didn't get out the same value in gdb as that assigned to si_addr in kernel. We are now believing that it might be a 32/64bit siginfo issue. But I don't have machine available at this time to track that down. (Another guy need to work with the shipped kernel.) Regards - Wu Zhou