Pedro Alves wrote:
> This is mostly OK as far as I'm concerned.  One question though: 
> 
>>         (ptid_from_core_section, core_section_name_from_ptid): New 
>> functions.
> 
> Is there still a reason the former takes bfd and bfd section pointers,
> instead of being a mirror of the latter (say, ptid_from_core_section_name)?
> 

Not a good reason. I just used what was available at the 
calling site. The attached patch makes arguments of the two 
new callbacks symmetrical (as much as was possible) as well 
as makes their names symmetrical.

This time, gdbarch.[ch] included.



ChangeLog:

* corelow.c (add_to_thread_list): Use new
gdbarch_ptid_from_core_section_name.
(get_core_register_section): Use new
gdbarch_core_section_name_from_ptid.

* gdbarch.sh (core_reg_section_encodes_pid): Deleted.
(ptid_from_core_section_name)
(core_section_name_from_ptid): New gdbarch callbacks.
(default_ptid_from_core_section_name)
(default_core_section_name_from_ptid): New functions.
* gdbarch.h, gdbarch.c: Regenerate.

* sol2-tdep.h (sol2_ptid_from_core_section_name)
(sol2_core_section_name_from_ptid): New declarations.
* sol2-tdep.c (sol2_ptid_from_core_section_name)
(sol2_core_section_name_from_ptid): New functions.
* amd64-sol2-tdep.c (amd64_sol2_init_abi): Register the two 
functions.
* sparc-sol2-tdep.c (sparc32_sol2_init_abi): Likewise.
* sparc64-sol2-tdep.c (sparc64_sol2_init_abi): Likewise.
* i386-sol2-tdep.c (i386_sol2_init_abi): Likewise.


Thanks,

Aleksandar Ristovski
QNX Software Systems