This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 1/2] Port gdbserver to GNU/Hurd
- From: Yue Lu <hacklu dot newborn at gmail dot com>
- To: Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Luis Machado <lgustavo at codesourcery dot com>, bug-hurd at gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 21:35:05 +0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Port gdbserver to GNU/Hurd
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAB8fV=jJ64i91VW52ZmdnEDZhd1ZGTAykDqoFyPJanCP=5beqA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAB8fV=iw783uGF8sWyqJNcWR0j_jaY5XO+FR3TyPatMGJ8Fdjw at mail dot gmail dot com> <87txi2i6t6 dot fsf at kepler dot schwinge dot homeip dot net> <5225C3C6 dot 8090101 at redhat dot com> <CAB8fV=gXmHSqLF14aF3RUU6paExSHft-gqySCsvyxiYELY4V+A at mail dot gmail dot com> <5228DBA7 dot 9050408 at redhat dot com> <87ob87c5lr dot fsf at kepler dot schwinge dot homeip dot net>
Hiï
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> (correct me if
>> I'm wrong here), the Hurd's threads are kernel threads
>
> Correct.
>
>> so it'd
>> be better to just make the GDB side use the lwp field too.
>> It's really a simple and mechanic change. Nothing in GDB core
>> actually cares which field is used. So in this case, it'd be
>> better if you send a preparatory patch
>
> Based on the current upstream master branch.
>
Should I change the gdb use lwp filed instead of tid field? There are
too many functions use tid. Like
make_proc(),inf_tid_to_thread(),ptid_build(), and there is a field
named tid in the structure proc also.
We can define a macro for gdbserver to use another ptid_build function
to use lwp instead of tid, if this, we only need do a little change.
Because of there are a lot of place to improve in my patch, I will
submit my next patch a little later. Now I have only finished
removing the spurious blank and the soft link.
--
Yue Lu (éå)