From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Ben Elliston <bje@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: SH5 simulator contribution
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 17:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C6088B3.7080702@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15456.16085.191791.112025@scooby.brisbane.redhat.com>
> Andrew> Unless the new simulator gains sh-dsp support, the sim directory will
> Andrew> need to be configurable so that the user can select either the DSP xor
> Andrew> the SH5 simulator. That, I suspect, is going to get messy. I think GDB
> Andrew> should be able to assume a single SH remote-sim interface but here, I
> Andrew> suspect, it is currently contending with two different interfaces :-(
>
> Hence, this is why the sh5 sim is only configured when the target is
> sh64-*-elf.
Er, humor me.
The sim/sh simulator has a specific register name / number / size
mapping and sh-elf-gdb knows how to use it.
This new sim/sh5 simulator has a different register / name / size
mapping and this difference is covered up by GDB. (I note the addition
of the sim-sh64.h file which is in itself a very good move).
The MIPS (unintentionally) went down this path and ever since the MIPS
has been trying to claw its way out of the resultant mess :-( Given
this, I think it would be better to just eliminate one of the
simulators. Failing that, ensure that at least the two simulators
complied to an identical register name/number/size interface.
Would it possible to get this new SH simulator to support the sh-dsp
instructions (there can't be that many of them) so that the old
simulator can be retired?
More as a wish list, would it also be possible to have separate but
integrated simulators for at least the few most recent SH variants -
like mn10300 and am33. I suspect this simulator was generated so it
shouldn't be too hard.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-06 1:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-02 2:06 Ben Elliston
2002-02-04 19:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-04 20:28 ` Ben Elliston
2002-02-04 20:59 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-04 22:29 ` Ben Elliston
2002-02-05 8:31 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-05 12:21 ` Ben Elliston
2002-02-05 17:36 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2002-04-12 2:46 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 9:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-12 9:45 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-15 1:48 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-18 18:32 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-29 10:23 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-29 10:47 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-29 11:30 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 2:48 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 2:57 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 2:57 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 2:57 ` Joern Rennecke
2002-04-12 2:58 ` Joern Rennecke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C6088B3.7080702@cygnus.com \
--to=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=bje@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox