Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] GDB: aarch64-linux: Reorganize gdb/arch/aarch64-gcs-linux.h

[Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org>]

Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca> writes:

>> diff --git a/gdb/aarch64-linux-nat.c b/gdb/aarch64-linux-nat.c
>> index 028de981588b..b2dd192a7b56 100644
>> --- a/gdb/aarch64-linux-nat.c
>> +++ b/gdb/aarch64-linux-nat.c
>> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
>>  #include "gdb_proc_service.h"
>>  #include "arch-utils.h"
>>  
>> -#include "arch/aarch64-gcs-linux.h"
>> +#include "arch/aarch64-linux.h"
>>  #include "arch/aarch64-mte-linux.h"
>>  
>>  #include "nat/aarch64-mte-linux-ptrace.h"
>> @@ -1013,7 +1013,7 @@ aarch64_linux_nat_target::read_description ()
>>       active or not.  */
>>    features.vq = aarch64_sve_get_vq (tid);
>>    features.pauth = hwcap & AARCH64_HWCAP_PACA;
>> -  features.gcs = features.gcs_linux = hwcap & HWCAP_GCS;
>
> This one could stay HWCAP_GCS, but I don't have a preference.

Luis prefers keeping it as HWCAP_GCS (and also renaming
AARCH64_HWCAP_PACA to HWCAP_PACA), so that's what I'm doing for v3.

> If we want to ensure / prove they are the same, we could add asserts
> like this in the nat/ header:
>
>   static_assert (AARCH64_HWCAP_GCS == HWCAP_GCS);
>
> That assert would only be checked when compiling natively for an aarch64
> system (where HWCAP_GCS is available), but it's better than nothing.

I mentioned this concern mostly for completeness, TBH. IMO it's not
worth adding this assert unless we're actually bitten by this problem
(which AFAIK hasn't happened yet).

-- 
Thiago