From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3568 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2014 17:11:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 3554 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jan 2014 17:11:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Jan 2014 17:11:37 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0DHBKCI021060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 12:11:34 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s0DGgin6019165; Mon, 13 Jan 2014 11:42:46 -0500 Message-ID: <52D41784.5040206@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 17:11:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" CC: "Metzger, Markus T" , "jan.kratochvil@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 21/29] record-btrace: provide xfer_partial target method References: <1387471499-29444-1-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <1387471499-29444-22-git-send-email-markus.t.metzger@intel.com> <52B34555.8040200@redhat.com> <52B4688E.2090603@redhat.com> <52B469FB.3090503@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <52B469FB.3090503@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00322.txt.bz2 On 12/20/2013 04:02 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 12/20/2013 03:55 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> + /* Check if the section we found is readonly. */ >> + if ((bfd_get_section_flags (section->the_bfd_section->owner, >> + section->the_bfd_section) >> + & SEC_READONLY) != 0) >> + { >> + /* Truncate the request to fit into this section. */ >> + len = min (len, section->endaddr - offset); >> + break; >> >> ... here, this should return TARGET_XFER_E_IO rather than break and >> falling through to the code that defers to the target beneath, as the >> caller will already do that for memory transfers. > > Ah, no, ignore that. You need to truncate len, so it wouldn't work > correctly, of course. Silly me. BTW, for the record, after sending that, I started thinking that it might be better/simpler to move this falling-through-to-the-target-beneath to the targets even for memory (like in your target), instead of having the core code do it. That is, remove the loop from raw_memory_xfer_partial. I think all reasons that might require that memory be handled differently have disappeared over the years (like., e.g., TARGET_OBJECT_RAW_MEMORY now traverses the stack too). Having all target objects behave the same seems better by not having special cases. Though I guess only actually trying it would tell better. -- Pedro Alves