Re: [patch 03/15] PIE: breakpoint_address_match gdbarch_addr_bit workaround

[Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>]

On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:11:55 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> Jan> Even with this patch I think there are still many bugs left in the
> Jan> operation of x86_64 gdb debugging i386 targets.  Do you find the
> Jan> C++ way as a viable one?
> 
> It definitely won't happen any time soon.

OK.


> Jan> +  int addr_bit = gdbarch_addr_bit (target_gdbarch);
> Jan> +  CORE_ADDR addr_mask = CORE_ADDR_MAX;
> Jan> +
> Jan> +  if (addr_bit < (sizeof (CORE_ADDR) * HOST_CHAR_BIT))
> Jan> +    addr_mask = ((CORE_ADDR) 1 << addr_bit) - 1;
> Jan> +
> 
> I am not so sure about this patch.  Is target_gdbarch really correct
> here?

It was forgotten quick-hack I have not noticed later, thanks.


> E.g., struct bp_location has a `gdbarch' field, which I presume
> could differ from target_gdbarch and which should probably be used in
> preference to it.  Maybe breakpoint_address_match needs two gdbarch
> arguments to allow proper interpretation of the CORE_ADDRs?

Those gdbarch fields discussion is now posted as
	[00/03] per-aspace target_gdbarch (+local gdbarch obsoletion?)
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-01/msg00227.html
and this pastch is reposted as:
	[03/03] Make breakpoint_address_match gdbarch_addr_bit-aware
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2010-01/msg00230.html


This patch is required for PIE but only in biarch (64bit debugger -> 32bit
inferior) or just for 32bit host built with --enable-64-bit-bfd mode.


Regards,
Jan