On 9/9/25 9:05 AM, 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.
Neither of these points appear to be relevant to this patch.
> I can merge the last 2 (including this) MicroBlaze patches to the
> gdb-17 branch as well.
Let's work on one patch at a time and not confuse matters by referring
to other unrelated patches.
Please split this patch into two. One change to NEWS, the other
changing the breakpoint op code.