lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] ptrace: add generic SET_SYSCALL request
Date
On Thursday 13 November 2014 15:49:20 Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote on 13.11.2014 11:21:28:
>
> > I have to admit that I don't really understand gdb internals, but from
> > a first look I get the impression that it will just do the right thing
> > if you reuse NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL on ARM64 with the same semantics.
>
> There's an interface between BFD and GDB proper involved here. BFD will
> detect the presence of register set notes in the core dump, and will
> translate them into virtual sections; GDB will then simply look up such
> sections under well-known names.
>
> In particular, the NT_S390_SYSTEM_CALL note will be translated by BFD
> into a virtual section named ".reg-s390-system-call"; GDB platform-
> specific code will look for sections of this particular name.
>
> So if you were to create notes using the same note type, by default it
> would do nothing on ARM64. You might add code to the ARM64 back-end
> to also look for a section ".reg-s390-system-call", but that would be
> somewhat confusing. Using a new, platform-specific note type for ARM64
> would appear to fit better with existing precedent.

Ok, thanks a lot for your insight and for confirming what Takahiro AKASHI
said. Let's use a new NT_ARM64_SYSTEM_CALL type with a different
number then.

Arnd


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-14 00:01    [W:0.557 / U:3.868 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site