Red Hat PIE patch

Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil@redhat.com
Tue Dec 8 13:57:00 GMT 2009


On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:06:33 +0100, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Tom Tromey wrote:
> > I have not yet reviewed numbers 9, 12, and 14.  These touched on things
> > that I am less familiar with.  I hope to get to them, but if someone
> > else wants to take a look, that is fine with me.

http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-11/msg00169.html
Patch 2 should be probably dropped as the patch itself makes no sense.  There
there is IMO some non-stop race unrelated to the PIE patched but triggered by
the patchset (causing testsuite regression).

http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-11/msg00170.html
Patch 3 has wrong gdbarch dealing but it should affect only Cell
frame-specific arches, if at all so did not get to it back.  Shouldn't be
rather `gdbarch' moved from `struct bp_location' to `struct address_space'?
But got lost in the details of gdbarch by Markus Deuling / Ulrich Weigand.


> Just FYI, I've applied the patches and done basic "aliveness"
> testing.  They do seem to work for me, and I will be doing more
> with them so I may have further testing words later.

Thanks, BTW there are now some add-ons to that series which are still not
properly split/integrated/reposted.
	http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewvc/rpms/gdb/F-12/gdb-archer-pie-addons.patch?content-type=text%2Fplain&view=co


Regards,
Jan



More information about the Gdb mailing list