From: Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>
To: Luis <luis.machado.foss@gmail.com>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org>,
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] GDB: Add gdb/arch/aarch64-pauth-linux.h
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2026 09:22:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6fbf151f-2213-475a-a5d5-08911a4b22bc@simark.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63d2e095-b170-4316-90a8-c62c71c64c40@gmail.com>
On 2026-02-22 05:06, Luis wrote:
> I don´t recall the discussions touching renaming/moving of these
> constants. But I see your point. I just don´t think we should block
> this series from going in on that particular snag. We should try a
> refactoring as a follow on.
>
This is what I was referring to, from Thiago:
Ok. While fixing this, I noticed that gdb/arch/aarch64-gcs-linux.h also
contains:
/* Feature check for Guarded Control Stack. */
#ifndef HWCAP_GCS
#define HWCAP_GCS (1ULL << 32)
#endif
which can be said to be an implicit dependency on an arch-specific
include file (since it relies on such file defining or not HWCAP_GCS).
Also, on non-AArch64 systems it relies on them not having by coincidence
an unrelated hardware capability bit also named HWCAP_GCS...
I fixed this in v2 by renaming the macro to AARCH64_HWCAP_GCS and
defining it unconditionally (following the existing example of
AARCH64_HWCAP_PACA).
From: https://inbox.sourceware.org/gdb-patches/87qzqkx8l1.fsf@linaro.org/T/#mbe0d3d5a2802f4f88abe907874ed44c063666639
I think that was a good idea, and it seems like we went backwards from
there?
> On the naming, I don´t mind adding an AARCH64 prefix, but I find it
> unlikely we will run into a naming collision given BSD uses equivalent
> constants. Again, not disputing the matter of what is technically
> correct or not.
This is already a refactoring / cleanup series, it's not harder to do it
right from the start.
Simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-22 14:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-17 6:00 [PATCH v3 0/4] GDB: aarch64-linux: Some header fixes Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-17 6:00 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] GDB: Add gdb/arch/aarch64-pauth-linux.h Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-21 12:14 ` Luis
2026-02-21 15:57 ` Simon Marchi
2026-02-22 10:06 ` Luis
2026-02-22 14:22 ` Simon Marchi [this message]
2026-02-22 15:15 ` Luis
2026-02-22 15:25 ` Simon Marchi
2026-03-03 5:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-17 6:01 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] GDB: Add gdb/arch/aarch64-fpmr-linux.h Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-21 12:15 ` Luis
2026-02-17 6:01 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] GDB: aarch64-linux: Move definition of struct user_gcs Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-21 12:20 ` Luis
2026-02-17 6:01 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] GDB: aarch64-linux: Fix build failure on musl systems Thiago Jung Bauermann
2026-02-21 12:23 ` Luis
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=6fbf151f-2213-475a-a5d5-08911a4b22bc@simark.ca \
--to=simark@simark.ca \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=judge.packham@gmail.com \
--cc=luis.machado.foss@gmail.com \
--cc=thiago.bauermann@linaro.org \
--cc=tom@tromey.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