Address spaces

Mark Kettenis
Fri Jul 25 19:13:00 GMT 2008

> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:22:11 -0700
> From: Stan Shebs <>
> Michael Snyder wrote:
> > Anyway, the idea of making CORE_ADDR a struct has been 
> > around for a long time.  We've done our best to avoid it, 
> > but sort of always known it would come back one day.
> >   
> Where my prototyping is evolving is to have a new type of object that is 
> the struct, tentatively called "target address", consisting of address 
> space + CORE_ADDR. From poking through all the references to CORE_ADDR, 
> it looks to me like 90%+ have an implicit single address space, so 
> structifying seems like an unnecessary nuisance. For instance, when 
> you're doing prologue analysis you're only going to be working in the 
> one address space (at least for non-Harvard). So I'm thinking higher 
> levels will pass around target addresses in a mostly-opaque way, then 
> when one gets down to working on a specific program / address space, the 
> CORE_ADDRs are extracted and used much as they are now.
> While not as abstractly elegant as making all addresses into objects 
> right off, it doesn't preclude us from going in that direction; someone 
> who wants to make a subsystem use target addresses instead of CORE_ADDRs 
> throughout could do so.

Did you consider extending 'struct ptid' with an adress space
identifier?  In a way, POSIX processes already correspond to an
address space, and the ptid is likely to be available in many places
where you need to make the distinction.

More information about the Gdb mailing list