From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8190 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2009 02:35:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 8180 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Apr 2009 02:35:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:35:15 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B78010558 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:35:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69D9710556 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:35:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lyzdf-0000oL-6D for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:35:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Mingw GDB build fails for M16C target Message-ID: <20090429023511.GA2873@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <82C3BC9106BCE149B63464D79D0A22FD0A68110C@sohm.kpit.com> <20090428155724.1797d332@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090428155724.1797d332@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg00778.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 03:57:24PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > Jim, > > It appears to me that comment, "Oddly, the gdb/sim interface uses host > signal numbers...", isn't true. My patch deletes this comment in > addition to using TARGET_SIGNAL_foo instead of SIGfoo. If you look at > remote-sim.c, you'll see that `enum target_signal' (which defines the > various TARGET_SIGNAL_foo constants) is used throughout the file. Shouldn't this be the same as common/sim-signal.c? sim_signal_to_host uses native numbers and sim_signal_to_target uses GDB protocol numbers. Then again, I'm totally baffled by this bit of the sim. It looks like sim_stop_reason returns a target signal and the callers check it against a host signal??? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery