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: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.

From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
To: ppluzhnikov at google dot com
Cc: brobecker at adacore dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 10:20:15 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
References: <20081209013252.9E1C83A6B2E@localhost> <20081209020744.GA11173@caradoc.them.org> <8ac60eac0812081842l6ac5344fw2fd57011d3dfef42@mail.gmail.com> <20081209133408.GA16288@caradoc.them.org> <20081210111322.GC20054@adacore.com> <8ac60eac0812100758i586c66eak533680a6eb07459c@mail.gmail.com> <8ac60eac0812101520x76366795ieea6afb6d48fb129@mail.gmail.com>

> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:20:37 -0800
> From: Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com>
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > I think it's pretty clear that BFD is to blame.
> 
> Well, may be not a BFD problem after all...
> 
> Does the patch below seem reasonable?

Sorry, it doesn't to me:
> 
> SW5kZXg6IGRieHJlYWQuYwo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09
> PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09ClJDUyBm
> aWxlOiAvY3ZzL3NyYy9zcmMvZ2RiL2RieHJlYWQuYyx2CnJldHJpZXZpbmcg
> cmV2aXNpb24gMS45OApkaWZmIC11IC1wIC11IC1yMS45OCBkYnhyZWFkLmMK
> LS0tIGRieHJlYWQuYwkxIE9jdCAyMDA4IDE2OjQxOjI3IC0wMDAwCTEuOTgK
> KysrIGRieHJlYWQuYwkxMCBEZWMgMjAwOCAyMjo0MTozNSAtMDAwMApAQCAt
> ODU1LDcgKzg1NSw3IEBAIHN0YWJzX3NlZWsgKGludCBzeW1fb2Zmc2V0KQog
> ICAgIChpbnRlcm4pLm5fdHlwZSA9IGJmZF9oX2dldF84IChhYmZkLCAoZXh0
> ZXJuKS0+ZV90eXBlKTsJCVwKICAgICAoaW50ZXJuKS5uX290aGVyID0gMDsJ
> CQkJCQlcCiAgICAgKGludGVybikubl9kZXNjID0gYmZkX2hfZ2V0XzE2IChh
> YmZkLCAoZXh0ZXJuKS0+ZV9kZXNjKTsgIAkJXAotICAgIGlmIChiZmRfZ2V0
> X3NpZ25fZXh0ZW5kX3ZtYSAoYWJmZCkpCQkJCQlcCisgICAgaWYgKHNpemVv
> ZiAoYmZkX3ZtYSkgPiA0IHx8IGJmZF9nZXRfc2lnbl9leHRlbmRfdm1hIChh
> YmZkKSkJCVwKICAgICAgIChpbnRlcm4pLm5fdmFsdWUgPSBiZmRfaF9nZXRf
> c2lnbmVkXzMyIChhYmZkLCAoZXh0ZXJuKS0+ZV92YWx1ZSk7CVwKICAgICBl
> bHNlCQkJCQkJCQlcCiAgICAgICAoaW50ZXJuKS5uX3ZhbHVlID0gYmZkX2hf
> Z2V0XzMyIChhYmZkLCAoZXh0ZXJuKS0+ZV92YWx1ZSk7CVwK

References:
- [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Paul Pluzhnikov
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Paul Pluzhnikov
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Joel Brobecker
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Paul Pluzhnikov
- Re: [patch] Fix a glitch in debugging 32-bit process with 64-bit GDB.
  - From: Paul Pluzhnikov

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