From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39155)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>) id 1S2ySO-0002Vm-S2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:21:38 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>) id 1S2yS3-0005yE-9x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:21:36 -0500
Received: from [222.73.24.84] (port=63519 helo=song.cn.fujitsu.com)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>) id 1S2yS2-0005xV-Vo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:21:15 -0500
Message-ID: <4F4F0791.50500@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:22:25 +0800
From: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4F4EE080.9060307@cn.fujitsu.com>	<4F4EE371.6000601@cn.fujitsu.com>
	<20120301.141030.246502741.d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120301.141030.246502741.d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 06/14 v7] target-i386: Add API to
 write cpu status to core file
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: jan.kiszka@siemens.com, anderson@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, eblake@redhat.com, lcapitulino@redhat.com

At 03/01/2012 01:10 PM, HATAYAMA Daisuke Wrote:
> From: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
> Subject: [RFC][PATCH 06/14 v7] target-i386: Add API to write cpu status to core file
> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 10:48:17 +0800
> 
>> +int cpu_write_elf64_qemunote(write_core_dump_function f, CPUState *env,
>> +                             target_phys_addr_t *offset, void *opaque)
>> +{
>> +    QEMUCPUState state;
>> +    Elf64_Nhdr *note;
>> +    char *buf;
>> +    int descsz, note_size, name_size = 5;
>> +    const char *name = "QEMU";
>> +    int ret;
>> +
>> +    qemu_get_cpustate(&state, env);
>> +
>> +    descsz = sizeof(state);
>> +    note_size = ((sizeof(Elf32_Nhdr) + 3) / 4 + (name_size + 3) / 4 +
>> +                (descsz + 3) / 4) * 4;
>> +    note = g_malloc(note_size);
>> +
>> +    memset(note, 0, note_size);
>> +    note->n_namesz = cpu_to_le32(name_size);
>> +    note->n_descsz = cpu_to_le32(descsz);
>> +    note->n_type = 0;
>> +    buf = (char *)note;
>> +    buf += ((sizeof(Elf32_Nhdr) + 3) / 4) * 4;
>> +    memcpy(buf, name, name_size);
>> +    buf += ((name_size + 3) / 4) * 4;
>> +    memcpy(buf, &state, sizeof(state));
> 
> x86_64_write_elf64_note() and x86_write_elf64_note() does the same
> processing for note data. Is it better to do this in helper functions
> in common?

I forgot to merge them. I will fix it.

Thanks
Wen Congyang

> 
> Thanks.
> HATAYAMA, Daisuke
> 
>