From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: swamy sangamesh <swamy.sangamesh@gmail.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: AIX 64bit support
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:23:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a9xlnyrw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL5y1_hO5yDeB0e0oJSfE4THZDcm7JDKjwZhfKOgE2pmYFqZKA@mail.gmail.com> (swamy sangamesh's message of "Thu, 9 Aug 2012 13:53:14 +0530")
>>>>> ">" == swamy sangamesh <swamy.sangamesh@gmail.com> writes:
>> Below patches adds the support for 64-bit gdb for ppc64 running on
>> AIX, plus some bug fixes which are caused
>> by the way gcc and xlc generated binary are read. Please consider the
>> patches if its fine.
Thanks for writing this.
First, you will need to file copyright assignment paperwork with the FSF
before we can accept this patch. Contact me off-list and I can get you
started on the process.
>> --- ./gdb/aix-thread.c_orig 2012-08-07 17:11:21.270057686 +0530
>> +++ ./gdb/aix-thread.c 2012-08-07 17:11:17.998084929 +0530
[...]
>> static int
>> +#ifdef BFD64
>> +ptrace64aix (int req, long long id, long long addr, int data, int *buf)
I tend to doubt that BFD64 is the correct check here.
I think you can use --enable-64-bit-bfd even on a 32-bit machine.
However in that situation you would not want to use ptrace64 --
presumably it wouldn't even exist.
Perhaps checking directly for ptrace64 in configure is best.
I agree with the other commenters about the desirability of a wrapper
function, rather than repeated #ifdefs all over.
>> --- ./gdb/inf-ptrace.c_orig 2012-07-25 21:07:04.273078850 +0530
>> +++ ./gdb/inf-ptrace.c 2012-08-02 00:35:56.425443341 +0530
There are many changes here, but I think this code is shared by many
ports. So, your changes have to take that into consideration. A
wrapper function may be the way to go.
>> --- ./gdb/xcoffread.c_orig 2012-08-07 17:36:42.378057756 +0530
>> +++ ./gdb/xcoffread.c 2012-08-07 17:36:48.702060320 +0530
I don't know anything about xcoffread. Could you say how you tested
this? Did you test it on a 32-bit host as well?
>> --- ./gdb/symtab.c_orig 2012-08-07 17:52:15.181060405 +0530
>> +++ ./gdb/symtab.c 2012-08-07 17:53:04.653058722 +0530
There is a change here, but this is generic code, and I think shouldn't
have an xlc-specific change. The problem has to be approached some
other way, preferably in the debuginfo reader.
The BFD changes should go to the binutils list.
Tom
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-23 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-09 8:23 swamy sangamesh
2012-08-09 9:01 ` Abid, Hafiz
2012-08-21 11:33 ` swamy sangamesh
2012-08-21 15:40 ` Joel Brobecker
2012-08-23 20:13 ` Tom Tromey
2012-08-23 20:23 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
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=87a9xlnyrw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=swamy.sangamesh@gmail.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