From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4953 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2001 16:34:00 -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 4923 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2001 16:33:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2001 16:33:57 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (totem.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.242]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA11894; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:33:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C1E1E58.9BA5D8E7@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:34:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser Organization: Red Hat , Inc. - Toronto X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7-10smp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Cagney CC: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com, Ben Harris , gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com, Jim blandy , Todd Vierling Subject: Re: Fix stack backtraces on 26-bit ARM References: <200110221104.MAA06894@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> <3BD73EF2.4050209@cygnus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00420.txt.bz2 I understood from BenH response and from a private conversation with Andrew that it was OK to check this in, so I did it (although this is a little borderline w.r.t. maintainership -- see below). Note that this is rather a new target (although an ARM one) so we would need a maintainer for it. You can see that it is basically new files and I don't have a NetBSR ARM machine around here (nor does Scott, I guess). I believe we would need to add the following to gdb/MAINTAINERS until this is decided: Index: MAINTAINERS =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/MAINTAINERS,v retrieving revision 1.133 diff -c -p -r1.133 MAINTAINERS *** MAINTAINERS 2001/12/15 17:09:04 1.133 --- MAINTAINERS 2001/12/17 16:30:31 *************** hurd native Mark Kettenis kettenis@gnu *** 207,212 **** --- 207,213 ---- NetBSD native & host J.T. Conklin jtc@redback.com SCO/Unixware Robert Lipe rjl@sco.com GNU/Linux ARM native Scott Bambrough scottb@netwinder.org + NetBSD ARM native (vacant) Solaris/x86 native & host (devolved) Peter Schauer Peter.Schauer@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de Solaris/SPARC native & host (devolved) Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >> Hmm, I have the bones of a completely clean NetBSD/arm port. It isn't > >> complete, but it was written without reference to the existing NetBSD code. > >> > > > > > > Ok, attached is most of the code. There's one more patch, which I'll send > > separately, that allows ARM targets to be single-stepped when there is no > > kernel/hw support for single stepping. > > > > R. > > > > Richard Earnshaw > > > > * config/arm/nbsd.mh config/arm/nbsd.mt config/arm/tm-nbsd.h > > config/arm/nm-nbsd.h config/arm/xm-nbsd.h: New files. > > * armbsd-nat.c: New file. > > * Makefile.in: Build it. > > * configure.host configure.tgt: Support NetBSD/arm. > > (There has been some out of band assignment e-mail which has left me > pretty confused :-) > > Lets see. > > RichardE, the above was developed while you were at ARM and is hence > covered, solely, by an ARM assignment? [yes | no] > > If this is true, can I suggest to the Arm maintainers that this be > considered. Then BenH can apply fixes to it (always easier and less > likely to have assignment problems) then new code. (I understand, third > hand this is kind of BenH's plan already). > > I think this is preferable as it gives GDB's NetBSD/ARM support a clear > and auditable paper trail. > > enjoy, > Andrew -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat - Toronto E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9