On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 22:53, Richard Henderson
wrote:
>
> On 7/17/24 02:55, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> Are you expecting the same GdbCmdParseEntry object to be registered
> >> multiple times? Can we fix that at a higher level?
> >
> > Its basically a hack to deal with the fact everything is tied to
Richard Henderson writes:
> On 7/17/24 02:55, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>> Are you expecting the same GdbCmdParseEntry object to be registered
>>> multiple times? Can we fix that at a higher level?
>> Its basically a hack to deal with the fact everything is tied to the
>> CPUObject so we register ever
On 7/17/24 02:55, Alex Bennée wrote:
Are you expecting the same GdbCmdParseEntry object to be registered
multiple times? Can we fix that at a higher level?
Its basically a hack to deal with the fact everything is tied to the
CPUObject so we register everything multiple times. We could do a if
Richard Henderson writes:
> On 7/16/24 21:42, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> void gdb_extend_qsupported_features(char *qsupported_features)
>> {
>> -/*
>> - * We don't support different sets of CPU gdb features on different
>> CPUs yet
>> - * so assert the feature strings are the same on
On 7/16/24 21:42, Alex Bennée wrote:
void gdb_extend_qsupported_features(char *qsupported_features)
{
-/*
- * We don't support different sets of CPU gdb features on different CPUs
yet
- * so assert the feature strings are the same on all CPUs, or is set only
- * once (1 CPU).
Hi Peter,
On 7/16/24 11:09 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 14:48, Alex Bennée wrote:
Gustavo Romero writes:
Hi Alex,
On 7/16/24 8:42 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
Coverity reported a memory leak (CID 1549757) in this code and its
admittedly rather clumsy handling of extending th
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 at 14:48, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Gustavo Romero writes:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > On 7/16/24 8:42 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> Coverity reported a memory leak (CID 1549757) in this code and its
> >> admittedly rather clumsy handling of extending the command table.
> >> Instead of
Gustavo Romero writes:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On 7/16/24 8:42 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> Coverity reported a memory leak (CID 1549757) in this code and its
>> admittedly rather clumsy handling of extending the command table.
>> Instead of handing over a full array of the commands lets use the
>> lighter w
Hi Alex,
On 7/16/24 8:42 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
Coverity reported a memory leak (CID 1549757) in this code and its
admittedly rather clumsy handling of extending the command table.
Instead of handing over a full array of the commands lets use the
lighter weight GPtrArray and simply test for the
Coverity reported a memory leak (CID 1549757) in this code and its
admittedly rather clumsy handling of extending the command table.
Instead of handing over a full array of the commands lets use the
lighter weight GPtrArray and simply test for the presence of each
entry as we go. This avoids compli
10 matches
Mail list logo
