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: New ARI warning Wed Jun 23 01:54:57 UTC 2010


Dan Jacobowitz:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 01:54:57AM +0000, GDB Administrator wrote:
> > 493a494,495
> > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:543: deprecate: read_memory: Replace read_memory() with regcache_read() et.al.
> > gdb/i386-tdep.c:543:  read_memory (from, buf, len);
> > > gdb/i386-tdep.c:557: deprecate: write_memory: Replace write_memory() with regcache_read() et.al.
> > gdb/i386-tdep.c:557:  write_memory (to, buf, len);
> 
> Am I missing something here?  Why would you replace read_memory with
> regcache_read?

The ARI claims "read_memory" and "write_memory" as "to be deprecated"
interfaces.  These were added by Andrew Cagney 2003-05-24:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2003-05/msg00341.html
at about the time he introduced get_frame_memory:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2003-06/msg00104.html

The idea seems to have been that all memory access was supposed to
identify the process/thread/target where the memory resided by
means of passing a frame.

However, this was never really fully pursues, it seems.  I'm not
really sure it still makes sense to keep these ARI entries ...

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com


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