Re: [rfa/ppc/branch too] Fix PowerPC/Linux cores

Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-08-02T12:08:00Z

On Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 05:49:34PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> I have no objection to it going on the branch; but I'd prefer to not
> see it go in on the trunk. OTOH, I'd have no objection to a patch
> which updates core-regset.c to use gdb_gregset_t / gdb_fpregset_t
> being applied to either the 5.1 release branch or the trunk. I'm
> not quibbling about correctness, but I'd prefer to see it done the
> "right" way on the trunk. That could mean using gdb_*regset_t in
> core-regset.c or it could mean using your upcoming cross platform
> corefile support or perhaps some combination.

Fixing it "right" will be cross corefile support, but changing
core-regset is correct for now. If no one objects I'm going to check
in the below patch tomorrow, branch and trunk (when is the branch
release point supposed to be? Isn't it coming up on us now?).

I tested the patch on powerpc-linux, and it works exactly as expected.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer

2001-08-02 Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>

* core-regset.c (fetch_core_registers): Remove HAVE_GREGSET_T
and HAVE_FPREGSET_T checks. Use gdb_gregset_t and
gdb_fpregset_t.

--- gdb-5.0.cvs20010729/gdb/core-regset.c.orig Thu Aug 2 11:26:38 2001
+++ gdb-5.0.cvs20010729/gdb/core-regset.c Thu Aug 2 11:27:05 2001
@@ -84,9 +84,8 @@
fetch_core_registers (char *core_reg_sect, unsigned core_reg_size, int which,
CORE_ADDR reg_addr)
{
-#if defined (HAVE_GREGSET_T) && defined (HAVE_FPREGSET_T)
- gregset_t gregset;
- fpregset_t fpregset;
+ gdb_gregset_t gregset;
+ gdb_fpregset_t fpregset;

if (which == 0)
{
@@ -113,7 +112,6 @@
supply_fpregset (&fpregset);
}
}
-#endif /* defined(HAVE_GREGSET_T) && defined (HAVE_FPREGSET_T) */
}
\f