This is the mail archive of the gdb-prs@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug gdb/20287] X32 and "gdb_static_assert (sizeof (nat_siginfo_t) == sizeof (siginfo_t))"


https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20287

--- Comment #13 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
All these different siginfo types give me headaches...  :-) I don't know
exactly which of the foo_siginfo_t types needs to be adjusted.

If gdb is built as x32, isn't the layout of the siginfo_t object that
PTRACE_GETSIGINFO returns the full 64-bit layout?  If so, then isn't
nat_siginfo_t all wrong for x32, since it uses x32 types (pointers, etc.)?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]