Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Patch to support AMD64 Solaris 10
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:39:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <417D5622.1000304@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0410251739090.3442@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> This patch adds initial support for Solaris 10 on AMD64.  The test results 
> (debugging both 64-bit and 32-bit binaries) are fairly similar to those 
> for unmodified GDB (built as 32-bit and debugging 32-bit binaries), though 
> as the prerelease operating system isn't yet fully reliable running the 
> GDB testsuite it's difficult to get full testsuite results for comparison.
> 
> The configuration is based on the existing IA32 Solaris support.

Sigh, this is unfortunatly adding a further use of a deprecated 
mechanism (DEPRECATED_TM_FILE) and a non strictly multi-arch port.  I 
assume it is largely for solib?

What about instead modifying things so that solib.c is always included 
and have it locally handle the legacy #ifdef SOLIB_ADD et.al. case?

> A limitation of this patch is that GDB needs to be built as a 64-bit 
> binary (configured with CC="gcc -m64": 32-bit compilation is the default 
> for this system) to work on AMD64 Solaris; GDB built as a 32-bit binary 
> doesn't work with this patch on AMD64 Solaris 10.  The problem is that 
> there is a single target triplet and so a single GDB configuration, but 
> 64-bit GDB should be using the functions in amd64-sol2-nat.c added by this 
> patch while 32-bit GDB (which in any case could only debug 32-bit 
> binaries, but the operating system does support plain x86 systems as well 
> as AMD64 ones, so such a GDB is desirable) should be using the functions 
> in i386v4-nat.c.  Any comments on the best approach for having the single 
> configuration cleanly support being built as both 32-bit and 64-bit?

The 64-bit PPC GNU/Linux developers have the same problem.

It's really a top-level configure / config.guess issue so best rasied 
there (gcc@?, config@?).  By the time things get to GDB it's too late - 
trying to switch to 'cc -m64' after the fact would leave us with BFD 
built 'cc -m32' but with GDB built 'cc -m64'.  Outch!

Andrew

PS: Suggest looking at inf-child and inf-ptrace.  The use of nm-*.h and 
macros to implement native configurations is also falling from favour.


  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-25 19:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-25 17:48 Joseph S. Myers
2004-10-25 19:39 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-10-25 19:55 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-25 22:03   ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-10-26 19:44   ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-10-26 20:50     ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-30 19:57       ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-30 20:01         ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-11-01 16:43 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-01 20:08   ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-11-01 20:34     ` Mark Kettenis

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=417D5622.1000304@gnu.org \
    --to=cagney@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.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