This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Improving GDB's mechanism to check if function is GC'ed
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>, Taimoor <tmirza at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:17:24 +0100
- Subject: Re: Improving GDB's mechanism to check if function is GC'ed
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <556DB1BB dot 50601 at codesourcery dot com> <86eglkeyfw dot fsf at gmail dot com>
On 06/10/2015 09:53 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> If the problem only exists on Nucleus, I am afraid I don't agree with
> accepting this change, because GDB doesn't support Nucleus. Sorry.
Hmm, does it really need to, though? We expose mechanisms like
add-symbol-file, xml library list with qXfer:libraries:read (the default
solib provider), xml target descriptions, "info os", etc., exactly so
that GDB doesn't have to learn about the myriad of random RTOS's out there.
That said, I don't really understand the patch. How can you have
real code at address 0, but then _not_ have address 0 covered
by a section?
Thanks,
Pedro Alves