This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@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]

Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64

From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
To: jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com
Cc: uweigand at de dot ibm dot com, drow at false dot org, tromey at redhat dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 20:43:18 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64
References: <200907071624.n67GO6bj015890@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <200907071759.n67HxhcF026713@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20090707182203.GA24153@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>

> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 20:22:04 +0200
> From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> 
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:59:43 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > But then I don't understand Jan's diff at all.  Linux has its own
> > implementation for TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY in linux-nat.c.  Why isn't
> > that one used?
> 
> Expecting the same problem must affect even non-Linux ptrace usage.  I will
> move it to linux-nat.c if you think so.

I suppose I should have been more specific.  You are trying to fix a
bug that you see on Linux isn't it?

And this fix should only be relevant for TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY isn't
it?

But Linux has its own implementation for doing TARGET_OBJECT_MEMORY
xfers in linux_proc_xfer_partial.

So I don't understand how this change fixes anything on Linux.

Can you enlighten me here?

References:
- Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64
  - From: Ulrich Weigand
- Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64
  - From: Mark Kettenis
- Re: [patch] Fix i386 memory-by-register access on amd64
  - From: Jan Kratochvil

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