This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
RE: support biarch gcore?
- From: Jon Zhou <Jon dot Zhou at jdsu dot com>
- To: Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- Cc: "jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com" <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, "gdb at sourceware dot org" <gdb at sourceware dot org>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 19:33:59 -0700
- Subject: RE: support biarch gcore?
- References: <201007062128.o66LSkNC032580@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> from "Mark Kettenis" at Jul 06, 2010 11:28:46 PM <201007071230.o67CUZYU029252@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
One more question
The patch is enable gdb to read the coredump generated by gcore
Or enable gcore to generate a readable coredump
From: Ulrich Weigand [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 8:31 PM
To: Mark Kettenis
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; Jon Zhou; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: support biarch gcore?
Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 22:48:44 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <email@example.com>
> > Unfortunately, it also turned out that the section sizes provided for
> > .reg in those targets that have gdbarch_core_regset_sections, while
> > currently unused, were also nearly all wrong ...
> > The following patch fixes those sizes, and changes linux-nat.c to
> > use them.
> Although I don't feel qualified to judge the powerpc bits, this makes
> quite a bit of sense to me. And yes, the value for amd64-linux is
> obviously wrong.
I've checked the patch in now.
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE