From: Jeremy Bennett <jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove doc on OpenRISC 1000
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:49:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <514B63E7.5070604@embecosm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfOKBzOMVCOCaQ5zCJzRfPdkZK7AgW3TY=V4n+g0K13Na_cZA@mail.gmail.com>
On 21/03/13 12:01, Franck Jullien wrote:
> 2013/3/20 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>:
>> On 03/20/2013 09:35 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
>>> [My mail sent yesterday didn't show in the mail archive, so send it again.]
>>>
>>> On 03/19/2013 09:35 PM, Jeremy Bennett wrote:
>>>> It is quite likely the GDB code for OpenRISC 1000 was never submitted.
>>>> The whole GNU tool chain was developed around 2000-2002, but only
>>>> binutils ever committed its code. The tool chain is still widely used
>>>> and maintained atwww.opencores.org.
>>>
>>> Hi Jeremy,
>>> The patch was submitted in the link I gave in my first mail, but only
>>> the doc bit was approved and committed. I can't tell why the non-doc
>>> bits were not approved.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've copied Franck Jullien, who is the most active developer of the
>>>> OpenRISC GDB port at present (I was in the past). The alternative to
>>>> deleting the documentation is to submit the port.
>>>
>>> If the port can be submitted soon (in 2~3 months maybe?), I am fine to
>>> keep the doc there, because it has been there for 10 years. Otherwise,
>>> I prefer to remove them first, personally.
>>
>> I'd prefer removing them from our tree too (and not wait).
>> 10 years have passed, and lots of non-"target remote" targets have
>> been yanked from the tree meanwhile -- I'm not familiar with OpenRISC,
>> but it's arguable whether we want a new "target jtag" nowadays,
>> compared to using the remote target (against something that talks jtag),
>> and perhaps we have better mechanisms for "info or1k spr" today
>> too (I don't know what that actually does).
>>
>> I think starting from scratch with a clean submission, that
>> includes the corresponding docs would make a lot of sense.
>>
>> --
>> Pedro Alves
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Our OpenRISC port is not ready yet. So, I think you're right.
> You can remove the old openrisc documentation and we'll
> start from scratch with a clean submission.
>
In the light of Pedro and Franck's comments, I agree. We should start
from scratch. The documentation doesn't even reflect reality -
proprietary JTAG interface has long gone from OpenRISC GDB. It has used
standard Remote Serial Protocol for a long time.
Jeremy
--
Tel: +44 (1590) 610184
Cell: +44 (7970) 676050
SkypeId: jeremybennett
Email: jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com
Web: www.embecosm.com
Twitter: @embecosm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-21 19:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-18 3:45 Yao Qi
[not found] ` <1363700147.23712.277.camel@laria>
2013-03-20 10:10 ` Yao Qi
2013-03-20 13:33 ` Pedro Alves
2013-03-21 12:24 ` Franck Jullien
2013-03-21 19:49 ` Jeremy Bennett [this message]
2013-03-22 1:40 ` Yao Qi
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=514B63E7.5070604@embecosm.com \
--to=jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/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