From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5919 invoked by alias); 17 Jul 2007 15:43:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 5910 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jul 2007 15:43:08 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:43:04 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6HFgxCW002085; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:42:59 -0400 Received: from pobox.hsv.redhat.com (pobox.hsv.redhat.com [172.16.16.12]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l6HFgwfR000355; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:42:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (dhcp-232.hsv.redhat.com [172.16.17.232]) by pobox.hsv.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l6HFgv34004893; Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:42:58 -0400 Message-ID: <469CE381.8000705@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:43:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070615) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Wielaard CC: Roland McGrath , frysk@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Leaving visible breakpoints in memory/core (Was: Breakpoint stepping) References: <20070712202339.A4D064D0489@magilla.localdomain> <1184601441.3628.58.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> In-Reply-To: <1184601441.3628.58.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q3/txt/msg00132.txt.bz2 Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 13:23 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > >> For a nondestructive dump, you also have the option of editting the memory >> as you copy it. >> > > Yes, that is the plan for bug #4761 (Task Memory view without inserted > breakpoints showing). There will be a getMemory() view that shows the > original bytes as found in the process (with anything frysk-core might > have added to it for things like breakpointing filtered out) and a > getRawMemory() that gives the raw bytes as manipulated by frysk-core. > Mark Some questions thoughts: How is this going to be implemented in the task? Are you planning on extending the abstract class Task with a getRawMemory()? If so, what does that mean for an implementing core file task? In the corefile task (dead/LinuxTask.java) are getMemory() and getRawMemory() returning the same ByteBuffer (CorefileByteBuffer) instance? Is this too live process specific and should be implemented some other way? Regards Phil