Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [rfc] MSR and System regs for RedBoot target
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 16:24:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D8A5CB9.5040106@ges.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86hehdp9dn.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>

> Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com> writes:
> 
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> The attached (a patch against my sysregs branch) based mostly by code 
>> previously written by Fernando Nasser, adds MSR and system register 
>> support for an i386 RedBoot target.  They each get their own group. 
>> That way:
>> 	info registers msr
>> and 
>> info registers system
>> works (but MSR and SYSTEM registers are not displayed by ``info 
>> registers''.).
> 
> 
> Those system registers seem like a good idea to me.  I'm not so sure
> about those MSRs.

I don't know either here.  I'm going through old lost changes.

>> The patch (apart from demonstrating that reggroups really do work :-) 
>> identifies a number of issues:
>> 
>> - The patch makes RedBoot the default i386 abi -- if nothing else hits, 
>> this gets to be it.  Its done by brute force.  This goes back to the 
>> default discussed earlier for the ``set osabi'' command.  Better re-read 
>> the thread ...
> 
> 
> Does the OS/ABI have to be named "RedBoot"?  I think most of this
> stuff could just as well be added to the generic i386 target.

It depends.

The MSR registers are implemented in a RedBoot specific way - it uses 
target_query() and a qMSR packet.  The qMSR packet came about because 
there are potentially ~4gb of MSR registers and the remote protocol 
doesn't support sparse register numbers.

There are several possible paths here:
- leave qMSR as something RedBoot specific
- formalize it and make it part of the protocol
- provide a mechanism for handling sparse remote protocol register 
numbers so that [Pp] packets can be used.

>> I'll park this in my sysregs branch.  RedBoot is available at 
>> http://sources.redhat.com/redboot/
>> 
>> comments?
> 
> 
> Is there consensus yet on how we should create the types for those
> flag bits?  If we choose Michael Ludvigs approach, this code should be
> converted before we check it in.

Yes, this stuff will need to be updated.
(I need to make those registers lowercase as well).

Andrew



  reply	other threads:[~2002-09-19 23:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-28 21:42 Andrew Cagney
2002-08-29 15:52 ` Mark Kettenis
2002-09-19 16:24   ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2002-09-19 16:28     ` Daniel Jacobowitz

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=3D8A5CB9.5040106@ges.redhat.com \
    --to=ac131313@ges.redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
    /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