From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24437 invoked by alias); 6 Jan 2014 01:21:05 -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 24425 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jan 2014 01:21:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,GARBLED_BODY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f172.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f172.google.com) (209.85.192.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 01:21:03 +0000 Received: by mail-pd0-f172.google.com with SMTP id g10so17433084pdj.17 for ; Sun, 05 Jan 2014 17:21:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.231.169 with SMTP id th9mr29997834pbc.113.1388971261556; Sun, 05 Jan 2014 17:21:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.92.72 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Jan 2014 17:21:01 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52CA02FE.6060804@codesourcery.com> References: <52CA02FE.6060804@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 01:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cast to uintptr_t when calling ptrace32 on aix From: David Edelsohn To: Yao Qi Cc: GDB Patches , Joel Brobecker , Ulrich Weigand Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 I meant it would be nice to encapsulate this in one file instead of defining ptrace32, ptrace64, ptracex, etc. multiple times in multiple files. It appears that you are performing the same cast as Joel, so it should be correct. It would be nice to use a consistent syntax. But it would be even nicer to do this only once. Thanks David On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 01/06/2014 12:22 AM, David Edelsohn wrote: >> Thanks for uncovering this and creating a patch. Any patch like this >> should be regression tested. >> > > OK, I'll test it on gcc111. > >> I thought that these issues had been addressed in Joel's patches from >> last August. >> >> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-08/msg00657.html >> >> Why do we need to go through this delicate dance in slightly different >> ways in multiple files? > > IMO, we do it in the same way, convert address to uintptr_t first and > then to "addr_ptr" (long long). Joel's is the implicit conversion and > mine is an explicit one. > > -- > Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)