You're too kind. Now I don't feel like an idiot. Thanks again. On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Dave Cheney <d...@cheney.net> wrote:
> It helps if you've hit the same issue before :) > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 8:14 AM, Dave Mazzoni <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Wow. You all are incredible -- your suggestion nailed it. Now I'm > getting: > > > > ./peekgo 0x43c00000 > > mem[0]:0x3020100 mem[1]:0x7060504 mem[2]:0xb0a0908 > > mem[3]:0xf0e0d0c ... > > > > which is PERFECT. Thanks! > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Dave Mazzoni <dav...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Thanks for the suggestions. I'm a bit confused though since Mmap > returns > >> > a > >> > slice of bytes. I print all the bytes as you can see, but only the > first > >> > byte at each 32 bit boundary is correct. I don't know casting several > of > >> > them together would somehow derive the correct value. > >> > >> Because Mmap returns a []byte, every access using that []byte will > >> load a single byte. But device memory is often magic. Doing a byte > >> load and doing a word load are two very different things from the > >> device's perspective. So what we're suggesting is that you do > >> something like > >> b := syscall.Mmap(...) > >> w := (*[1024]uint32)(unsafe.Pointer(&b[0])) > >> and then print w[0]. That will access the memory as a 32-bit word, not > a > >> byte. > >> > >> Or conversely change your C program to print out one byte at a time > >> and see what you get. > >> > >> Ian > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
