From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23258 invoked by alias); 3 Sep 2002 19:23:39 -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 23248 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2002 19:23:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.3) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 2002 19:23:37 -0000 Received: by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com; id UAA27083; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:23:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from unknown(172.16.202.26) by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com via smap (V5.5) id xma026959; Tue, 3 Sep 02 20:23:02 +0100 Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (rearnsha@localhost) by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g83JN2109855; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:23:02 +0100 Message-Id: <200209031923.g83JN2109855@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> To: Jason R Thorpe cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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. Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] arm-netbsdelf cross-debugging fixes In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 01 Sep 2002 16:58:43 PDT." <20020901165843.B4034@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 12:23:00 -0000 From: Richard Earnshaw X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00038.txt.bz2 > This fixes a bunch of cross-debugging issues for the arm-netbsdelf > target, and makes it more like the other NetBSD targets I've worked > on recently. > > Unfortunately, the change disables "gdb_multi_arch=yes" for the > arm-*-netbsd* entry in configure.tgt. The reason for this is that > the tm file needs to include "solib.h". As far as I can tell, no > platforms with shared libraries can be fully multi-arch until all > the solib stuff is multi-arch'd. > Hmm, evil thought. If I said 'no' then perhaps you'd have to go multi-arch the solib code.... No, couldn't be that mean :-) > I need approval for a change to the shared ARM target code. I needed > to add a function to deconstruct/reconstruct the R15 register on the > 26-bit ARM CPUs. The new functions: > > * Split a 26-bit R15 into PC and a 32-bit-format PSR. > > * Take a PC and a 32-bit-format PSR and combine them back > into a 26-bit R15. This is going to conflict horribly with my WIP for using cooked registers. Is there any chance it can be separated out, or made less invasive? > > While there, I also fixed a problem with arm_addr_bits_remove -- No > 26-bit systems can run in Thumb mode, and so doing an arm_pc_is_thumb > on them is unnecessary (and could return incorrect results if debugging > code which runs in FIQ mode, since (pc & 1) == FIQ mode on those CPUs). > Yep, that would be a good move, but it would be easier to say yes if it were a separate patch. R.