This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/RFC Prec] Add Linux AMD64 process record support second version, (AMD64 Linux system call support) 3/3
- From: Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>
- To: Michael Snyder <msnyder at vmware dot com>
- Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, gdb-patches ml <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:08:31 +0800
- Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC Prec] Add Linux AMD64 process record support second version, (AMD64 Linux system call support) 3/3
- References: <daef60380907061940l6625d38p6b1a03a9527565ab@mail.gmail.com> <4A5A8438.6030005@vmware.com> <daef60380907170149l3e673abv5060dd2f88195127@mail.gmail.com> <4A6121FC.3030205@vmware.com> <daef60380907191020l285cb144jb8e42bd944e5ae91@mail.gmail.com> <4A6B80EA.9020802@vmware.com> <daef60380907271844s1a9c758dxfaf63f36bffc338@mail.gmail.com> <daef60380908022240l339a7e50of943d910b2da5f08@mail.gmail.com> <4A7F5379.9000005@vmware.com>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 06:53, Michael Snyder<msnyder@vmware.com> wrote:
> If no comment for one more week, I suggest commit them.
> Michael
Checked in.
Thanks,
Hui
>
> Hui Zhu wrote:
>>
>> Ping.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 09:44, Hui Zhu<teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> Could you please help me review this patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hui
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 06:02, Michael Snyder<msnyder@vmware.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009-07-20 ?Hui Zhu ?<teawater@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> ? ? ? Add Linux AMD64 process record support.
>>>>>
>>>>> ? ? ? * amd64-linux-tdep.c (amd64_linux_record_tdep): New variable.
>>>>> ? ? ? This struct has the argument for the function
>>>>> ? ? ? "record_linux_system_call".
>>>>> ? ? ? (amd64_linux_syscall_record): New function. Parse the
>>>>> ? ? ? system call instruction and call function
>>>>> ? ? ? "record_linux_system_call" to record execute log.
>>>>> ? ? ? (i386_linux_init_abi): Initialize "amd64_linux_record_tdep".
>>>>> ? ? ? Set "amd64_linux_syscall_record" to "i386_syscall_record".
>>>>
>>>> I have no further issues with this patch.
>>>>
>>>> Mark? ?Final word is yours.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>