From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA: Support libthread_db xregs interface
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <412A55E8.3060100@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vt2pt5wvsjf.fsf@zenia.home>
> This patch adds support to GDB for the libthread_db 'xregs' functions,
> which allow registers not present in 'gregset_t' or 'fpregset_t' to be
> passed through libthread_db. The contents of the 'xregs' register set
> is not specified by GDB; the libthread_db client can specify whatever
> size it likes, and libthread_db will pass it through unchanged.
>
> I'll post a second patch which defines an 'xregs' register set for the
> PowerPC E500 SPE registers.
>
> At present, the GNU C library's libthread_db's xregs functions are
> stubbed out; I also have a patch to glibc to implement them, which
> I'll be submitting. If GDB loads a libthread_db that does not
> implement the xregs functions, this patch handles that case.
>
> These have all been tested on E500 powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu and on
> i686-pc-linux-gnu (where they should have no effect).
>
> This patch should allow us to remove the call to dummy_sse_values in
> supply_fpregset. Not that that call is especially necessary or
> helpful at the moment anyway, as far as I can tell.
>
> This patch was originally posted here:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-03/msg00571.html
>
> I believe it's been revised to implement the suggestions made there.
[...]
> + v:=:const struct regset *:xregs_regset:::0
Mark's regset change added both the "regset.h" object and the
regset_from_core_section architecture method. They, together, replace
the old *-nat.c:fill_regset et.al. calls.
Can we implement the equivalent here for ptrace/thread-db?
--
Instead of:
> + if (! warned_xregs_not_implemented)
> + {
> + warning ("thread debugging library is too old to access "
> + "%s registers.",
> + gdbarch_xregs_name (current_gdbarch));
can we use "complaint". That "thread" should be "Thread".
--
> + v:=:int:xregs_size:::0
> + v:=:const char *:xregs_name:::0
I gather these were fields in the original xreg_desc object but are
missing from the "regset"? Should these, instead be added to the
regset, or a new object extending regset created?
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-23 20:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-12 23:39 Jim Blandy
2004-08-23 20:40 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-08-25 5:07 ` Jim Blandy
2004-08-26 9:40 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-08-27 16:27 ` Andrew Cagney
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=412A55E8.3060100@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@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