From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5352 invoked by alias); 23 Jun 2006 12:42:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 5344 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Jun 2006 12:42:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:42:20 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FtkzI-0004S4-Gt; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:42:16 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 12:42:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Richard Earnshaw Subject: Re: [rfa] Cross corefile support for ARM Message-ID: <20060623124216.GA17098@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Richard Earnshaw References: <20060608152432.GA20630@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060608152432.GA20630@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00357.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 11:24:32AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > I've reimplemented ARM Linux corefile support to use the new interfaces, and > work for cross-debuggers. I needed this last week to track down a problem > in an EABI binary and I didn't have an EABI native GDB available. > > I've tested it manually in both cross and native configurations; it actually > fixes FPA (NWFPE) support for core files, which had gotten broken at some > point in the past when ARM stopped providing FP0_REGNUM. > > This whole story is a bit of an embarrassment. I've implemented this at > least twice in the past but never cleaned it up enough to submit it. And > Girish Shilamkar submitted something similar in February, although I didn't > notice at the time that (A) he didn't remove the existing core file support > in arm-linux-nat.c, which would probably break native ARM gdbs, and (B) the > FP support was bogus and didn't match any core dump layout I'm famliar with. > And I never heard back about TimeSys's copyright assignment, so that's been > sitting in limbo. > > Look OK? Hi Richard, Did you notice: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches//2006-06/msg00071.html (Needed it again today :-) -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery