On 9/9/25 12:05 PM, Gopi Kumar Bulusu wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025, 9:04 PM Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca <mailto:simark@simark.ca>> wrote:
>
>     On 9/9/25 11:31 AM, Simon Marchi wrote:
>     > On 9/9/25 3:16 AM, Gopi Kumar Bulusu wrote:
>     >> namaskaaram,
>     >>
>     >> The macro MICROBLAZE_BREAKPOINT is set to an instruction opcode that does not meet the criteria for software breakpoint instruction as set forth in the AMD MicroBlaze ISA. This patch  addresses the problem.
>     >>
>     >> This simple patch concludes a series of patches that add AMD MicroBlaze gdbserver target support for GNU/Linux.
>     >>
>     >> Updated NEWS to include MicroBlaze gdbserver target.
>     >>
>     >> Build/Test - tested by building microblazeel-linux-gdb and verifying that software breakpoint works
>     >> using gdbserver as target.
>     >>
>     >> dhanyavaadaaha
>     >> gopi
>     >>
>     >
>     > Can you explain how the NEWS entry you add relates to the code change?
>     >
>     > Simon
>
>     It sounds like it is related to this patch, merged back in March:
>
>     https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=a93f60043a26e0b8b0ea71a63201b9352ce52a6f <https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=a93f60043a26e0b8b0ea71a63201b9352ce52a6f>
>
>     If so, then the NEWS entry should be in the "Changes in GDB 17" section,
>     and cherry-picked to the gdb-17-branch branch (and it should not be added
>     in this particular patch).
>
>
> All the patches in a series of changes ( bfd, gdb, gdbserver) are needed for breakpoint to work from gdb for  gdbserver target.
>
> After a discussion at the beginning of this work (over a year ago) - I followed the path of submitting patches as smaller logical units.
>
> I  can merge the last  2 (including this) MicroBlaze  patches  to the gdb-17 branch  as well.

I'd be fine having this patch that changes the breakpoint instruction in
the gdb-17-branch.  What is the other one?

Simon