From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15396 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2014 06:54:23 -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 15387 invoked by uid 89); 21 Aug 2014 06:54:23 -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_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com Received: from mail-by2lp0243.outbound.protection.outlook.com (HELO na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (207.46.163.243) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 06:54:20 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.242.36.148) by BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.242.36.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1005.10; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 06:54:17 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.5.20]) by BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.5.246]) with mapi id 15.00.1005.008; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 06:54:16 +0000 From: "catalin.udma@freescale.com" To: Pedro Alves , Richard Earnshaw , "Yao Qi" CC: Philippe Waroquiers , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH] aarch64/gdbserver: fix floating point registers display Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 06:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <85303e79d83947958b01132bc0613e72@BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> References: <1407835166-827-1-git-send-email-catalin.udma@freescale.com> <53E9E1C2.6010707@arm.com> <53E9EB9A.7000304@codesourcery.com> <1407932734.2182.67.camel@soleil> <53EB5C86.4030307@codesourcery.com> <53EB7965.8070208@arm.com> <53F4DC74.8080807@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <53F4DC74.8080807@redhat.com> x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;UriScan:; x-forefront-prvs: 0310C78181 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(6009001)(479174003)(189002)(199003)(164054003)(51704005)(377454003)(13464003)(24454002)(108616004)(83072002)(74316001)(107046002)(2656002)(93886004)(33646002)(77982001)(92566001)(106116001)(105586002)(87936001)(99286002)(95666004)(85852003)(86362001)(99396002)(561944003)(76482001)(101416001)(50986999)(46102001)(74662001)(81342001)(77096002)(74502001)(54356999)(80022001)(21056001)(81542001)(19580405001)(76576001)(83322001)(85306004)(106356001)(66066001)(4396001)(31966008)(64706001)(15975445006)(19580395003)(20776003)(79102001)(76176999)(24736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2PR03MB175;H:BY2PR03MB175.namprd03.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: freescale.com X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00462.txt.bz2 Thank you all for your comments. As a follow-up, should I re-submit my patch without changing=20 cpsr size in regformats/aarch64.dat? ... While the current cpsr size de-synchronization would be fixed by reverting the patch=20 we are discussing about? Regards, Catalin > -----Original Message----- > From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:36 PM > To: Richard Earnshaw; Yao Qi > Cc: Philippe Waroquiers; Udma Catalin-Dan-B32721; gdb- > patches@sourceware.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] aarch64/gdbserver: fix floating point registers > display >=20 > On 08/13/2014 03:42 PM, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > On 13/08/14 13:39, Yao Qi wrote: > >> On 08/13/2014 08:25 PM, Philippe Waroquiers wrote: > >>> The 'it' in 'fix it' is ambiguous to me. > >>> Does the 'it' mean: > >>> fix aarch64-core.xml to change cpsr to 32 bits ? > >> > >> That was what I meant, however .... > >> > >>> or does that confirm the initial proposal i.e. > >>> fix e.g. aarch64.dat to change cpsr to 64 bits ? > >> > >> ... I find a patch changed cpsr to 64 bit in last Dec. > >> > >> [PATCH] AARCH64: Change cpsr type to be 64bit. > >> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-12/msg00720.html > >> > >> and looks aarch64.dat was not updated together in this patch. > >> > >> I am sure that aarch64.dat and aarch64-core.xml are not in sync, > >> but I don't know which way to go, sorry. > >> > > > > Changing the XML doesn't sound like the right way forward, the XML can > > be embedded into other components as part of the register description > > interface. > > > > Hmm, I can't see where anyone ever formally approved that change. In > > fact, Mark K commented at the time: > > > > "Basing GDB's fundamentals on a particular OS's ptrace(2) > > implementation is a bad idea." > > > > So it seems to me that that change was indeed incorrect and should > > probably be reverted (at least in its current incarnation). >=20 > I agree, and I'm surprised to learn the patch went in. :-/ >=20 > Thanks, > Pedro Alves