[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Core dump (semi) update

From: Roland McGrath
Subject: Re: Core dump (semi) update
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 01:24:23 -0500 (EST)

> readelf doesn't produce much useful info IMHO.  Like if fpregset etc
> are there or not.

Like I said, this is the internal contents of the note.  readelf tells you
the sizes and locations of the note, and if those are sane, you can look at
the data directly and interpret according to the struct type.  This is what
you have to do to have anything to say about whether the dumping is being
done correctly or not.  Please do it.

>    I was about to suggest you look at your gdb build to see what went
>    wrong.
> Where should I look?

The configure checks for the fields of lwpstatus_t are what I had in mind.
Look at bfd/elf.c and see the various HAVE_* macros that
elfcore_grok_lwpstatus depends on.  Make sure your bfd/config.h defines all
the ones that should exist looking at Hurd's <sys/procfs.h>.

>    But looking at the source, there isn't a configure check for
>    pr_fpreg to go with the bfd/elf.c code (elfcore_grok_lwpstatus).
>    That would explain that.
> This didn't work, produced the same output as without it (and yes, I
> did regenerate configure).

And removed config.cache, I hope?

> I really think that the problem lies with the dumping, I did a quick
> debug of gdb and it showed that the size of the fpregset is 0 when it
> should be 380 or some such (causing "warning: Wrong size fpregset in
> core file" to be printed).

Please read my previous message again to understand why the direction I
pointed you above is what matters here.

> Please, lets _not_ change it, I like this one quite a lot instead of
> the weird stuff Linux has.  I'd rather fix or help fixing bugs then
> seeing rewrites to uglier formats.

Fine by me.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]