> I'm is in the process of reviewing/rewriting your patch. The main
> issue here is that it is a bit intrusive and does so in a
> backend-specific way. I already had an idea of introduction of
> backend-neutral layer, in order to support uprobes. for example, and
> your submission poked me again i
> I already had an idea of introduction of
> backend-neutral layer, in order to support uprobes. for example, and
> your submission poked me again in this direction. I'll try to provide
> a feedback with updated set of patches in a coming weeks, so it can
> become a part of 4.17 release. Is it ok
> I'll try to provide a feedback with updated set of patches in a coming weeks,
> so it can
> become a part of 4.17 release. Is it ok for you?
>
Thanks Eugene; that will be great, much appreciated.
--
Check out the vibra
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Stan Cox wrote:
> On 02/10/2017 03:21 PM, Stan Cox wrote:
>> Requesting comments on this patch, which adds support for the gdb
>> remote serial protocol
> Ping on the patch. Also, fixed a register pool issue, which was not allowing
> for varying x8664 register po
On 02/10/2017 03:21 PM, Stan Cox wrote:
> Requesting comments on this patch, which adds support for the gdb
> remote serial protocol
Ping on the patch. Also, fixed a register pool issue, which was not allowing
for varying x8664 register pool sizes.
-
Requesting comments on this patch, which adds support for the gdb
remote serial protocol, which is described further in "info gdb
'Remote Protocol' 'Packets'" This protocol connects to gdbserver,
which catches the syscalls and returns information about them, as well
as register and memory info, via
