Re: fstep added

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 07:51 -0600, Phil Muldoon wrote: 
> Resurrecting this thread for a little bit. Is this issue related to:
> 
> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3727
> 
> I'm hazarding a guess this all comes down to ptrace accessing the 
> inferior's memory word by word, and that optimizations made in access to 
> the inferior's memory (ie by mmaping /proc/$$/memory) will benefit fcore 
> as well as fstep? My knowledge here is really fuzzy.

Yes and http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3761 which are
basically the same issue. To speedup fstep and fcore) we would like to
mmap /proc/<pid>/mem for the inferior and wrap it in an inua ByteBuffer.
This doesn't provide write access, but we do reads mostly anyway. You
can imagine a ByteBuffer returned by Task.getMemory() that delegates
reads through such an mmap backed inua ByteBuffer and writes delegated
through a ptrace backed inua ByteBuffer.

Cheers,

Mark