From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix amd64->i386 linux syscall restart problem
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 11:42:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bc353e59-f640-2d09-8a71-984f0102733e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190409192916.79fcb539@f29-4.lan>
On 4/10/19 3:29 AM, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 18:46:45 +0100
> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>> + void *ptr = (gdb_byte *) gregs
>>> + + amd64_linux_gregset32_reg_offset[I386_EAX_REGNUM];
>>
>> Need to wrap the expression that spawns two lines in ()s.
>
> I've made this change. And the other one too.
>
>>> +
>>> + /* Sign extend EAX value to avoid potential syscall restart problems. */
>>
>> I'd rather see both implementations use the same comment. Could you
>> merge them?
>
> I started to merge them and then decided to write a more detailed
> comment based on the text that I wrote for the commit comment. I
> have, for the moment anyway, copied the comment to both locations with
> only slight changes which reflect where the comment is located. The
> problem with having copies of the same long comment in two or more
> places is making sure that if one gets updated, then the rest do too.
> It might be better to have one refer to the other.
>
> I'm thinking that it might be preferable to have something like this
> in gdb/gdbserver/linux-x86-low.c:
>
> /* Sign extend EAX value to avoid potential syscall restart problems.
>
> See amd64_linux_collect_native_gregset() in gdb/amd64-linux-nat.c
> for a detailed explanation. */
I'm OK with that. My concern with different comments in two places
is that at some point, like we managed to merge the x86
watchpoints code from gdb and gdbserver under gdb/nat/, we might be
able to merge this code as well. And different comments make the job
a bit harder for the person doing that, since the person _then_ has to
decide what the resulting comment will be like. If we can do it now,
it's preferable. A pointer from one end to the other, like you're
proposing, works for me too.
> Below is a diff showing the new comments. It also includes the
> changes which wrap the multi-line expressions in parens.
Thanks, that new version of the comment looks great.
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-10 11:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-17 5:13 Kevin Buettner
2019-04-04 16:51 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-04-09 17:46 ` Pedro Alves
2019-04-10 2:29 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-04-10 11:42 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2019-04-11 0:16 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-05-21 12:59 ` Tom de Vries
2019-06-21 6:34 ` [PING][PATCH] " Tom de Vries
2019-07-08 17:00 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-07-12 11:42 ` Tom de Vries
2019-07-12 12:24 ` Kevin Buettner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bc353e59-f640-2d09-8a71-984f0102733e@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox