Hi!
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 11:37:36PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Confirm that you haven't caused any regressions by running the GDB
> testsuite (natively) without and then with your change (don't forget to
> apply the testsuite patch I gave you earlier, to avoid the testsuite
> hanging (know
Hi!
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:40:40 +0800, Yue Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > On 09/12/2013 04:05 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> >>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-09/msg00253.html
> First thank you
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 04:05 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> This is what I meant:
>>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-09/msg00253.html
>>>
>>> I was thinking you'd wrap gnu_xfer_memory.
>>
On 09/18/2013 02:48 PM, Yue Lu wrote:
> (btw, with
> unknown reason, I can't patch your patch automatically, I have to
> modify the gnu-nat.c line by line according to your patch).
I'm going to guess you copy/pasted the patch to a new file,
and while doing that, something (your editor or mailer?)
On 09/18/2013 02:48 PM, Yue Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>
>> /me gives it a try.
>>
>> I grepped for ptid_build and ptid_get_tid in *gnu* files, and
>> adjusted all I found.
>
> I have tried this way before, but it doesn't work.
> After apply your patch, the g
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 10:58 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:35:05 +0800, Yue Lu wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Thomas Schwinge
>>> wrote:
> (correct me if
> I'm wrong here), the Hurd's threads a
On 09/12/2013 04:05 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> This is what I meant:
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-09/msg00253.html
>>
>> I was thinking you'd wrap gnu_xfer_memory.
>>
>
> I have study your patch,
Thanks. Did you try building gdb
On 09/12/2013 04:05 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> Honestly to say, I have copied them from function gnu_xfer_memory. But
> I think, before reference a pointer, check whether it was a NULL seems
> not a bad way :-).
We don't go around checking for NULL before _every_ pointer
dereference. :-)
NULL pointer c
On 09/09/2013 10:58 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:35:05 +0800, Yue Lu wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Thomas Schwinge
>> wrote:
(correct me if
I'm wrong here), the Hurd's threads are kernel threads
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
so it'd
be better
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> This is what I meant:
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-09/msg00253.html
>
> I was thinking you'd wrap gnu_xfer_memory.
>
I have study your patch, but I found there is no to_xfer_partial field
or something similar in gdbserver's
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> I'm actually very excited to see gdb and gdbserver sharing
> a single target backend, even if we still have many wrinkles
> in the interfaces to iron out! It does looks like this way
> results in lots of less work, and makes me believe we
Hi!
On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:35:05 +0800, Yue Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> >> (correct me if
> >> I'm wrong here), the Hurd's threads are kernel threads
> >
> > Correct.
> >
> >> so it'd
> >> be better to just make the GDB side use the lwp field too.
> >>
Hi，
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> (correct me if
>> I'm wrong here), the Hurd's threads are kernel threads
>
> Correct.
>
>> so it'd
>> be better to just make the GDB side use the lwp field too.
>> It's really a simple and mechanic change. Nothing in GDB core
>> actua
Hi!
On 09/05/2013 08:29 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> > +static int
>> > +gnu_read_memory (CORE_ADDR addr, unsigned char *myaddr, int length)
>> > +{
>> > + int ret = 0;
>> > + task_t task = (gnu_current_inf
>> > + ? (gnu_current_inf->task
>> > +? gnu_current_inf->task->port : 0) : 0);
>> > + i
Hi!
Just a very quick one; short on time.
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 20:29:43 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 09/05/2013 11:53 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> > This is the my new patch.
You've received quite some positive feedback, good! :-)
> Thanks. Follows a few comments, by no means an in depth review.
Th
> I'm actually very excited to see gdb and gdbserver sharing
> a single target backend, even if we still have many wrinkles
> in the interfaces to iron out!
Mee too!
--
Joel
On 09/05/2013 11:53 AM, Yue Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the my new patch.
Thanks. Follows a few comments, by no means an in depth review.
We'll probably need to iterate a few times. I'm counting on
Thomas and others to help as well!
I'm actually very excited to see gdb and gdbserver sharing
a
Hi,
This is the my new patch.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> So my idea would be, instead of adding the new files under gdbserver,
> to remove the spurious differences (formatting, reordering, etc.) that
> were introduced in the gdbserver copies of the files, eliminating th
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:11:02 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 09/03/2013 10:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>> > [strategy]
>>
>> I've been thinking about this this morning, after seeing these
>> patches.
>>
>> For new gdbserver p
Thanks for your review!
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>
> For new gdbserver ports, this path just seems to swim further away from
> a full sharing approach, by adding lots duplication as first step, and
> actually making it hard to see what exactly needed to be changed/adapte
Hi!
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:11:02 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 09/03/2013 10:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > [strategy]
>
> I've been thinking about this this morning, after seeing these
> patches.
>
> For new gdbserver ports, this path just seems to swim further away from
> a full sharing a
On 09/03/2013 10:38 AM, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Hi!
>
> For context, Yue Lu is a student participating in this year's Google
> Summer of Code program, to port gdbserver to GNU Hurd, and is both a GDB
> as well as a GNU Hurd newbie. (So, be gentle.) ;-)
>
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:00:32 +0800, Yu
Hi!
For context, Yue Lu is a student participating in this year's Google
Summer of Code program, to port gdbserver to GNU Hurd, and is both a GDB
as well as a GNU Hurd newbie. (So, be gentle.) ;-)
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:00:32 +0800, Yue Lu wrote:
> This is my patch to port gdbserver to GNU/Hurd
Hi all,
This is my patch to port gdbserver to GNU/Hurd. Most of code are
copied from [gdb]/gdb/gnu-nat.c.
Now the gdbserver on GNU/Hurd can set breakpoint and check memory or
register(but without float-register support).
You can also view the code on my github.
https://github.com/hacklu/gdbserve
24 matches
Mail list logo
