[commit] Prefer xfer_partial for memory xfers
Mon Oct 4 14:53:00 GMT 2004
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 12:27:50PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>>> + NOTE: cagney/2004-09-30:
>>> + The old code tried to use four separate mechanisms for mapping an
>>> + object:offset:len tuple onto an inferior and its address space: the
>>> + target stack; the inferior's TO_SECTIONS; solib's SO_LIST;
>>> + overlays.
>>> + This is stupid.
>>> + The code below is instead using a single mechanism (currently
>>> + strata). If that mechanism proves insufficient then re-factor it
>>> + implementing another singluar mechanism (for instance, a generic
>>> + object:annex onto inferior:object:annex say). */
> Does this mean that a bunch of new code would have to be written to
> make this compatible with overlays? How about solibs?
I tested on PPC/NetBSD and it showed no regressions so the solib case is
definitly covered (and as the note implies, there's serious level of
redundancy in the current "design").
More information about the Gdb-patches