From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11668 invoked by alias); 7 Oct 2014 16:37:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 11656 invoked by uid 89); 7 Oct 2014 16:37:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com Received: from mail-bl2on0092.outbound.protection.outlook.com (HELO na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (65.55.169.92) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 16:37:04 +0000 Received: from BN1AFFO11FD006.protection.gbl (10.58.52.31) by BN1AFFO11HUB045.protection.gbl (10.58.52.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1039.16; Tue, 7 Oct 2014 16:37:01 +0000 Received: from xsj-pvapsmtpgw01 (149.199.60.83) by BN1AFFO11FD006.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.58.52.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1039.16 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 7 Oct 2014 16:37:01 +0000 Received: from unknown-38-66.xilinx.com ([149.199.38.66] helo=xsj-smtp1) by xsj-pvapsmtpgw01 with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1XbXjI-00007q-Ce; Tue, 07 Oct 2014 09:35:16 -0700 From: Ajit Kumar Agarwal To: Pedro Alves , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" CC: Vinod Kathail , Vidhumouli Hunsigida , Nagaraju Mekala Subject: RE: [Patch, microblaze]: Added cleanup data for invalid target description Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 16:37:00 -0000 References: <07638ee5ff984d21a51b468a841f9dba@BN1AFFO11FD045.protection.gbl> <54340FBE.2090508@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <54340FBE.2090508@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RCIS-Action: ALLOW Message-ID: <6216c950de8d45809bad2b931446f6d7@BN1AFFO11FD006.protection.gbl> X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:149.199.60.83;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(438002)(479174003)(377454003)(377424004)(13464003)(51704005)(189002)(199003)(164054003)(51914003)(24454002)(46102003)(80022003)(6806004)(50466002)(19580395003)(44976005)(19580405001)(120916001)(64706001)(108616004)(47776003)(99396003)(4396001)(76482002)(74316001)(85306004)(20776003)(95666004)(106466001)(50986999)(54356999)(53416004)(87936001)(107046002)(77096002)(2656002)(104016003)(46406003)(23726002)(85852003)(106116001)(33646002)(21056001)(97756001)(92566001)(31966008)(76176999)(86362001)(107986001)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BN1AFFO11HUB045;H:xsj-pvapsmtpgw01;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:unknown-60-83.xilinx.com;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BN1AFFO11HUB045; X-Forefront-PRVS: 035748864E Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of xilinx.com designates 149.199.60.83 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=149.199.60.83; helo=xsj-pvapsmtpgw01; Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 149.199.60.83) smtp.mailfrom=ajit.kumar.agarwal@xilinx.com; X-OriginatorOrg: xilinx.com X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00120.txt.bz2 -----Original Message----- From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com]=20 Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 9:37 PM To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; gdb-patches@sourceware.org Cc: Vinod Kathail; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala Subject: Re: [Patch, microblaze]: Added cleanup data for invalid target des= cription On 10/07/2014 11:16 AM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: >=20 > From 00f2692d10e0254366471095516d657693aeff42 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Ajit Kumar Agarwal > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 15:06:08 +0530 > Subject: [PATCH] [Patch, microblaze]: Added cleanup data for invalid targ= et description. >>s/Added/Add/. But even better would be saying what this actually intends= to do, which is "reject". Note the [PATCH] tag usually end ups stripped w= hen >>the commit is imported into git, but the redundant [Patch, ...] seems= like something you added manually, and is unnecessary. Thanks for the suggestion. >=20 > Cleanup the tdesc data if the target description check is invalid. >=20 > 2014-10-07 Ajit Agarwal >=20 > * microblaze-tdep.c (microblaze_gdbarch_init): Use of > tdesc_data_cleanup. So, I'd write: ~~~ >>[PATCH] Microblaze: Reject invalid target descriptions >>We currently validate the target description, but then forget to reject i= t if found invalid. >>gdb/ >>2014-10-07 Ajit Agarwal >> * microblaze-tdep.c (microblaze_gdbarch_init): If the description >> isn't valid, release the tdesc arch data and return NULL. ~~~ I will make this Change. Thanks for suggestion. >>But, you didn't state how you tested this, which should be part of the co= mmit log too. I have tested the Microblaze Design with and without stack -protect registe= rs. The gdb command "info registers" displayed the register correctly. If s= tack protect designs is not selected only core registers are displayed. Whe= n the stack-protect register is selected in the design, the core registers = along with stack-protect registers are displayed. >>Did you make sure incorrect descriptions are rejected and GDB warns about= them? We don't have the invalid Microblaze design with which I can test gdb warni= ng and cleaning up the tdesc data. >>Did you make sure valid descriptions do end up correctly used? Yes. >>Or does this uncover other bugs? It doesn't cover other bugs but I would like to state the following "The gdbserver patch which I have sent to FSF would be using expedite "rpc= " and the patch that got committed in FSF for stack-protect registers has t= he expedite set as "pc". For the gdbserver patch it should be "rpc". I will= send a separate patch for this by changing the Makefiles as you have sugge= sted." Thanks & Regards Ajit Thanks, Pedro Alves