This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [design change] record-replay linux ABI level
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: oza Pawandeep <oza dot pawandeep at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb at sourceware dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 07:39:37 -0600
- Subject: Re: [design change] record-replay linux ABI level
- References: <CAK1A=4xtgYd8hQEwHxjLQiv4eqhCu0cSRDmmbFJvBDJwDxUM+Q__46748.0269181125$1336555010$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com> <87sjf9qecr.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <CAK1A=4xbh0M=yfc2MQpZdDCJEPnL3_z8=TA0VSE7qVCoO0Dn-Q__42617.423789534$1336639800$gmane$org@mail.gmail.com>
Oza> The definition of system call record maps fine to x86. but arm
Oza> syscall numbers are different. [partially] for e.g. on x86 sycall
Oza> number for sys_epoll_create = 254 while on ARM it is 250. the more
Oza> we go down on defined system calls the more the numbers are
Oza> differing on ARM and we loose one to one trivial mapping.
My understanding of the current design is that the ARM code would see
the syscall 250, and have a mapping to turn that into
gdb_sys_epoll_create (== 254). This can be done bidirectionally with
two lookup tables.
I suppose this could still not work in some scenarios. One question is
whether these occur in practice or are merely theoretical.
I don't really care about this API either way.
With a solid justification it is fine to change it.
Tom