This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] catch syscall -- try 4 -- Architecture-independent part
- From: Sérgio Durigan Júnior <sergiodj at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:12:10 -0300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] catch syscall -- try 4 -- Architecture-independent part
- References: <1232929831.26873.22.camel@miki> <200901260053.06295.pedro@codesourcery.com> <1232945747.26873.27.camel@miki> <1232989355.26873.39.camel@miki> <20090201193306.GJ4597@caradoc.them.org> <1235561189.14363.20.camel@miki> <20090227221133.GA12904@caradoc.them.org> <1238352626.23609.14.camel@miki> <20090331154452.GA13260@caradoc.them.org>
Hi Daniel,
I forgot to ask one more thing. Here it goes.
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 11:44 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > With this you mean that I should remove the methods from gdbarch?
>
> Yes, that's what I mean.
>
> The way I think about this is that every gdbarch routine is a way for
> some architecture to handle things differently. If we can make every
> architecture work the same way, we should do that instead.
Right, I'm already removing the code from gdbarch, but I'm facing a
problem that I'm unable to solve. Basically, I have a method in gdbarch
called gdbarch_xml_syscall_filename, which returns the name of the XML
that is going to be used. I need this because the XML file is different
for each supported arch.
The thing is that if I remove this, I can't think in a good way to
retrieve this filename. Is it ok to keep this single method inside
gdbarch?
Thanks,
--
Sérgio Durigan Júnior
Linux on Power Toolchain - Software Engineer
Linux Technology Center - LTC
IBM Brazil