From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15379 invoked by alias); 23 Oct 2003 21:01:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15349 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2003 21:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2003 21:01:02 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9NL10M15633 for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:01:00 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9NL0xr28279; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:00:59 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-2.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.2]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h9NL0tcY029451; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 17:00:56 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h9NL0nk01244; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 14:00:49 -0700 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:01:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1031023210049.ZM1243@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Marcel Moolenaar "Re: RFA: ia64 tdep patch" (Oct 22, 3:02pm) References: <3F9049EF.8060209@redhat.com> <1031020201315.ZM20659@localhost.localdomain> <3F9459B6.5000909@redhat.com> <1031021222239.ZM26261@localhost.localdomain> <3F95BB43.1040703@redhat.com> <1031022193747.ZM31624@localhost.localdomain> <3F96EF3E.6070402@redhat.com> <20031022220258.GA10464@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> To: Marcel Moolenaar , "J. Johnston" Subject: Re: RFA: ia64 tdep patch Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00703.txt.bz2 On Oct 22, 3:02pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > They are needed because r32 to r127 are not accessible via the PTRACE > > interface. They are accessed via the bsp. Without flagging them as > > pseudo-registers, the regcache code returns 0 for all these registers. > > It depends. For FreeBSD I added ptrace(2) functions to get and set > stacked registers that are on the kernel stack. The problem more > generally is that registers above bspstore (but below bsp) are > not accessable in memory. I think it's better for gdb to keep the > distinction between stacked registers on the backing store and > "dirty" stacked registers. The distinction avoids that gdb makes > assumptions that are only valid on Linux or even only for the native > code. Unfortunately, the assumptions that you mention are already in place. (And have been in place for quite some time). > BTW: I have partial support for FreeBSD/ia64. I'll send patches as > soon as I feel that the backtrace is reliable enough. Patches will most certainly be welcome. Do you have an FSF copyright assignment for GDB yet? If not, you might want to start working on the paperwork now... Kevin