From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13711 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2006 06:03:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 13701 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Nov 2006 06:03:42 -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; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 06:03:33 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1GlJIU-0007br-Ss; Sat, 18 Nov 2006 01:03:27 -0500 Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 06:03:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA][3/5] New port: Cell BE SPU (the port itself) Message-ID: <20061118060326.GA29135@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <22583.192.87.1.22.1163421727.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> <200611180009.kAI09xif013603@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200611180009.kAI09xif013603@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) 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: 2006-11/txt/msg00195.txt.bz2 On Sat, Nov 18, 2006 at 01:09:59AM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > More generally, your approach of going towards a single debugger for > Cell is of course something I would like to see work in the end -- but > that is something that requires difficult problems to solve first. > I had hoped to start out with a strictly single-target SPU standalone > port first, that would be easily acceptable by avoiding those difficult > issues, and *then* in a second step address the combined Cell debugger. > > I would be happy to try out whatever suggestions you might have to > achieve that goal ... Do you need a native GDB for this? That is, would starting with an SPU cross target plus an SPU-aware gdbserver be useful? For now that would probably mean a separate gdbserver which only spoke SPU. I'm not sure if that's possible at all based on your original patch; just asking. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery