From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31081 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2002 11:05:03 -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 30944 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2002 11:04:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.3) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Feb 2002 11:04:57 -0000 Received: by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com; id LAA08091; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:04:55 GMT Received: from unknown(172.16.1.2) by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com via smap (V5.5) id xma007713; Tue, 5 Feb 02 11:04:22 GMT Received: from cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA24067; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:04:22 GMT Received: from sun18.cambridge.arm.com (sun18.cambridge.arm.com [172.16.2.18]) by cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA02467; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:04:21 GMT Message-Id: <200202051104.LAA02467@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Nick Clifton cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Reply-To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Organization: ARM Ltd. X-Telephone: +44 1223 400569 (direct+voicemail), +44 1223 400400 (switchbd) X-Fax: +44 1223 400410 X-Address: ARM Ltd., 110 Fulbourn Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge CB1 9NJ. X-Url: http://www.arm.com/ Subject: Re: SIM: Handle XScale COFF binaries In-reply-to: Your message of "05 Feb 2002 10:55:56 GMT." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 03:05:00 -0000 From: Richard Earnshaw X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00110.txt.bz2 > Hi Guys, > > I have checked in the following patch. It fixes the ARM simulator > so that COFF based XScale binaries will be correctly simulated. The > problem was that the COFF header did not have enough bits to > distinguish between the v5, v5T, v5TE and XScale architectures, and > so it was defaulting to v5, disabling the simulation of the XScale > instructions. > > Cheers > Nick > > 2002-02-04 Nick Clifton > > * wrapper.c: If a v5 architecture is detected, assume it might be > an XScale binary, since there is no way to distinguish between > the two in the COFF file format. UG. Can't we restrict this so that it only happens if we have COFF files (as it stands ELF files will do the same as well). R.