From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id I5GYFSyJzl8nUAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 14:57:32 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4BE421F071; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:57:32 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RDNS_NONE,T_DKIM_INVALID,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (unknown [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAE9E1EF4B for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:57:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F13A53896C0A; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:57:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail-ej1-x642.google.com (mail-ej1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::642]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD130389682F for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:57:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BD130389682F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sifive.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jimw@sifive.com Received: by mail-ej1-x642.google.com with SMTP id d17so21253709ejy.9 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:57:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sifive.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HbX/SQHI8vMZXps5WzN1PIuDVAIVz4M45ebd6AUKZ8s=; b=AsmeJXse+GMSFoeGIrWBvwPShI1fC6UFm6siGH6fRD4m8mUhm8ctumjg8t0xnTbP6x N70xAunBRgMedmN6D1yHtTe1JfMsvOD638rY1uwN7dLM68bff0EsIVcSQxEN0q1cxIG0 VZldDXhHpaB3DevpaJVXLEDEYwtVRPg61/Fc4l63w+B1TxJQ67MzEosYhS/r7LIyihSv PMMuPgnhnFFy4HBxmtnDf6/jwq4w6toSH+FpHctNG2nB07EIJNU3Dsl+UAxO3Xpgw+Sm GZmvfxdQ6KOjg2uggHdQsLYhACIcxmf8DpDjnrPcFwJsO0c3yn3gwjjyx1QwBifAv+Dc xnaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HbX/SQHI8vMZXps5WzN1PIuDVAIVz4M45ebd6AUKZ8s=; b=eeTSc/0uIkmrmU4UYhjg4y5G0jseuT4Hd4ZP6+bfLGbzV/8WHkyrXM+uqpGx9UwmDg uo8EPLUDkswmGQG6oe1H2w1R1mOVDSk1HMEUMjWmHvajvlbKMVB8kCOW2XUB/Eu3vk0K FhI3PYCc9B1P67g8myRR77HSNwuqkSVbMP9znaaO7OCP2oVGmizzXsllhfv44VNF/yZN b9R+TPhbk+D7hMuoDUQm5McEuxhBSaqKAJ7AvMqchv2CAlMb/kLujzrcw0YsOzg61SWU 3igce71nW+fei7aaeSuNOjy2COrVuhGv0WmzD1iJin176EZkylM0EpKZgJV3u8Ubpeop yXtQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530LfTlixv7T3f3BvTzM1Xkgvfoa4HI6MYifMOe6oSQQsehmhz9j ItLyVS/NyR9OERyySYUIihkCxm+u53gZqTeN4QV9mg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzpJECnYj+iRlci7q3VwrODVVodj3sMrPgq5aYW3tL4B2Pm4pXTJaklT1ZOtlO7UJLoZv96EAEjxECbr8Q07Ss= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:ceca:: with SMTP id si10mr19927009ejb.547.1607371046832; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:57:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201207121056.GE2729@embecosm.com> In-Reply-To: <20201207121056.GE2729@embecosm.com> From: Jim Wilson Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:57:15 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Bare-metal core dumps for RISC-V To: Andrew Burgess Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Binutils , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 4:10 AM Andrew Burgess wrote: > I agree that it would be a good idea to document this layout > somewhere. Am I correct in thinking that here: > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-elf-psabi-doc/blob/master/riscv-elf.md > Is where such things should be documented? > Yes, this would be the correct place. I guess it's probably worth getting the documentation approved before > merging to GDB in case changes are suggested. > This would be nice, but I don't consider this required as a prerequisite, considering that there has been no demand for gdb related docs as yet, other than DWARF register numbers. I'm still waiting for the RVI T&R HSC to create a committee to own the ABI, so meanwhile the ABI committee is basically me, though I do usually try to get an opinion from at least one LLVM developer before I accept patches. And I Iry to include FreeBSD folks too when necessary. FYI The binutils patches are OK now. I think the only unresolved issue is the NT_ number to use, and I'm OK with the ascii number, though you may need to get agreement from others on that. Jim