From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39802 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2017 10:03:43 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 39751 invoked by uid 89); 17 Mar 2017 10:03:42 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*i:sk:83fuicz, H*MI:sk:83fuicz, H*f:sk:83fuicz X-HELO: mail-pg0-f43.google.com Received: from mail-pg0-f43.google.com (HELO mail-pg0-f43.google.com) (74.125.83.43) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:03:40 +0000 Received: by mail-pg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id 21so5685747pgg.1 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 03:03:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bNFEvJPmLhqNbUsx3zRqQBGpJdHQaPdYtUuMXsYwuNU=; b=Lr6ub/nfrXLkuSvYpKN2+skQ1wX2W+hhNaoEfSTwKh1jbUs+45axM9QbHST2kNoAp6 wxJeLbzhu1v1dkH4DucwT0XWzOc/vGOvtrbvTSv2kWwkEfJSkieC5o3i1fVy2mZEl8u2 xLj4Ehi8fgPtHisvPFI74LNFLVfFIA3fPRJWK3gEKBh0AG6w4CCpeR5NW+/9ix7iPb74 PXzrwFZUUoeiYQPIxSvFU4xQg1i/C55/xGNwD6wrxpqRuNuiizDNdBSa0+Y39Sp0AYf6 RdbfrrXfthYj6Av74ja2bdg8HPO0ECxmivvU4Kmq3a4g+bDNmo56xXcC/TUEdvGZEbJz t9IA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1CmVSWYhXvOKY3yxz6WJWLzEn6ZhpYu16NlDobDFWcpe8b1nEMSYegahmqmYyAUA== X-Received: by 10.84.148.134 with SMTP id k6mr18998409pla.128.1489745019636; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 03:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (z17.124-44-180.ppp.wakwak.ne.jp. [124.44.180.17]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i26sm9918136pfi.129.2017.03.17.03.03.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 03:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:03:00 -0000 From: Stafford Horne To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, franck.jullien@gmail.com, openrisc@lists.librecores.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] gdb: Add OpenRISC or1k and or1knd target support Message-ID: <20170317100337.GP2418@lianli.shorne-pla.net> References: <61be7be503333904f9533549b0a809bed4066ac3.1489728533.git.shorne@gmail.com> <83lgs4z3ty.fsf@gnu.org> <20170317093247.GO2418@lianli.shorne-pla.net> <83fuicz1nk.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83fuicz1nk.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00310.txt.bz2 On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:35:27AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:32:47 +0900 > > From: Stafford Horne > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, franck.jullien@gmail.com, > > openrisc@lists.librecores.org > > > > > > +The OpenRISC 1000 architecture has evolved since the first port for > > > > +@value{GDBN}. In particular the structure of the Unit Present register has > > > > +changed and the CPU Configuration register has been added. The port of > > > > +@value{GDBN} version @value{GDBVN} uses the @emph{current} > > > > +specification of the OpenRISC 1000. > > > > > > I'm not sure what this text conveys. Can you tell why it is important > > > to have this information in the manual? I might then suggest a change > > > in wording. > > > > Its saying that if you are using an old version of the CPU it might not > > run as expected with this version of GDB. Ill change to explain that > > without talking about previous ports of GDB. > > > > Something like: > > > > Earlier version of the OpenRISC architecture did not include the UPR > > (unit present) or CPUCFGR (CPU configuration) registers. This version > > of @value{GDBN} expects these to be present. > > That's okay, but we should also tell the reader what to do if the > expected registers are not present. Is there anything they could do > except upgrade to a newer version of OpenRISC? Actually, sorry, I was going off the text above. When I checked the code it seems I removed the code that depended on these registers after earlier reviews. The XML target description includes all of these registers and more. I may either remove this or change to explain about the target description architecture dependency. But the target description is not a hard dependency. Thanks for the quick feedback. -Stafford