This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: ia64 portion of libunwind patch
- From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>
- To: "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>, davidm at hpl dot hp dot com
- Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, davidm at napali dot hpl dot hp dot com
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:25:14 -0700
- Subject: Re: RFA: ia64 portion of libunwind patch
- References: <3FA2B71A.3080905@redhat.com> <3FA2CA1B.7000502@redhat.com> <16290.59502.799536.383397@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FAC12D3.2070207@redhat.com> <16300.8192.489647.740612@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FAC2454.2030009@redhat.com> <16300.9949.513264.716812@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FAC2D03.8070607@redhat.com> <16300.12503.585501.180768@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FAC33B3.2030403@redhat.com> <1031108001337.ZM18506@localhost.localdomain> <3FAC388A.10207@redhat.com> <16300.39298.323956.667764@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FAD7F01.2050407@gnu.org> <16304.3297.662733.250523@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FB0149C.1060908@redhat.com> <16323.61371.6654.950171@napali.hpl.hp.com> <16334.39106.297492.636397@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FCFC9FD.4040106@redhat.com> <16335.54210.785826.438051@napali.hpl.hp.com> <3FD788FD.6020305@redhat.com>
On Dec 10, 3:58pm, J. Johnston wrote:
> David Mosberger wrote:
> >>>>>>On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:57:49 -0500, "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn@redhat.com> said:
> >
> >
> > Jeff> A questions regarding the .so name issue you mentioned. We
> > Jeff> are already grabbing the function names from UNW_OBJ macro
> > Jeff> from the generic libunwind.h header. I think we could
> > Jeff> generate the libunwind.so name similarly using the UNW_TARGET.
> > Jeff> Any problems with this strategy? (any scenarios where this
> > Jeff> value doesn't match the extension used by the libunwind
> > Jeff> library?)
> >
> > No, that sounds fine to me. The part that I don't understand is that
> > at the moment it seems that only one libunwind-$TARGET.so can be
> > loaded. With a multi-target-capable gdb, that would obviously not be
> > sufficient, as you'd want to load, say, libunwind-ia64.so.1 for ia64
> > and libunwind-x86.so.1 for x86. But it's mostly a theoretical issue
> > at this point.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --david
> >
>
> I have created the patch to use UNW_TARGET.
>
> Yes, the current implementation doesn't support multiple gdb
> targets, but it is set up to make such a task relatively
> straightforward in the future (i.e. simply put the function handles
> off of the target vector and pass in the target name).
>
> Kevin, ok to commit?
Sure.
Kevin