Re: [RFA] ppc-linux-nat.c AltiVec regs ptrace

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
 > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 09:09:08PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
 > > Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
 > >  > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 07:28:27PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
 > >  > > In case of 2.2.5 the powerpc version of the file gets installed. While
 > >  > > for 2.2.1 the one with the definitions for PTRACE_GETFPXREGS is installed.
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > Ok then, should we support the older version or not?
 > >  > > If not we have two options:
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > 1. if glibc gets a patch with the new PTRACE_GETVRREGS requests, then
 > >  > >    we can add another different configuration check.
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > 2. We can just rely on the run time check. Which means I have to redo
 > >  > >    the patch again [where is that bucket].
 > >  > > 
 > >  > > Actually doing just 2 would work also with the older version, I guess.
 > >  > > Unless I am missing some other subtlety. Ok I'll change it.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Sounds good to me.  Might want to submit a patch to add GETVRREGS to
 > >  > libc, also, I suppose...
 > > 
 > > Yes, it's probably better.
 > > 
 > > Here is a new patch.
 > > 
 > > 2002-02-20  Elena Zannoni  <ezannoni@redhat.com>
 > > 
 > > 	* ppc-linux-nat.c (PTRACE_GETVRREGS, PTRACE_SETVRREGS): Define.
 > 
 > I like this much better, thank you!
 > 
 > My only concern is that you'll have a problem when glibc does define
 > them; might want to conditionally define these.

Oh, yes, true.
Will do when I check it in.

Thanks for your help.

Elena

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