From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id INk5Kz1eG2CtbAAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 21:38:53 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id A466E1EFCB; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:38:53 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [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 B9BCC1E939 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:38:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DB83AA9414; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 02:38:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 14DB83AA9414 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1612406332; bh=jmALYc1jTVQ+cBgIzlXRdKQ2gC83tAC0ajolRumbhcw=; h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=cAPS6KwdtxUW+9FFqdGTyYjMiuoUUX5HuTaD6jgKcPdnhPqRaGDfXoNiMknX5tsBb jebRzFJcMHSJec1p9/vgRxFyIfnCgJ8enTA1dSxeh5xpoY/631RuOSdazt1LX99l83 g4trVqBHeejgPlX+rbfu1SdYU+sF1pvKAtbQaftw= Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF5E385700A for ; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 02:38:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 6FF5E385700A Received: from vapier (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 444A6341C6C; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 02:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 21:38:46 -0500 To: Jim Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sim: riscv: new port Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Jim Wilson , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20210112111842.17223-1-vapier@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: , From: Mike Frysinger via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Mike Frysinger Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 03 Feb 2021 15:50, Jim Wilson wrote: > We actually have two RISC-V gdb simulators. The one you originally wrote, > and a cgen simulator that Embecosm wrote. I deferred upstreaming your > simulator in the hope that the cgen simulator might be better, but > unfortunately the cgen simulator has a serious problem that it can't easily > support all architecture variations. This is a problem that will only get > worse as more extensions are added to the architecture. I don't know if > the cgen simulator problems are fixable. So I personally prefer your > simulator. But there are others that would like to see the cgen simulator > go in. I don't think we can add both of them. I don't know how to resolve > that debate. Plus there is the problem that I'm involved in so much stuff > that I can't get anything done anymore. But anyways if there is a vote, > I'm voting for your simulator. my plans are to merge this one even if it is simpler & not as complete, and then drop the cgen one on top of it once we think it's in a good state. i have not looked into the cgen issues to say what can be addressed. tbh, i'm not super familiar with cgen, and have been slowly peeking at it over time. i'm sure at this point you know way more than me about it. > Your simulator wasn't lost. It can be found at > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-binutils-gdb/tree/fsf-gdb-10.1-with-sim > This includes your original port, with some minor improvements from Kito > Cheng and myself, and a number of others. They are listed in the ChangeLog > file. This is known to work with the gcc testsuite, though we primarily > use qemu for simulator testing so it doesn't get tested very often. This > is part of riscv/riscv-gnu-toolchain, and if you do SIM=gdb when building > and testing a toolchain, it will use gdb sim to run the gcc testsuite. > > Or if you want to start over with a new simulator that is OK too. We can > fix it to work with the gcc testsuite just like we fixed the old one. i'm aware that there's a squashed one with updates not authored by me in the riscv repos. i specifically avoided those as the authorship is not clear and i didn't want to untangle copyright assignments. so i started with the last one purely by me and updated it to work with what has been merged into the upstream tree. i'm happy to merge fixes you've come up with since i last did any real work, but i want to make sure to keep them independent for authorship & copyright assignment purposes. it's not about me trying to maintain control over it all and refusing to accept changes i didn't come up with by myself :). the FSF is picky about keeping copyrights in line (i'm not complaining, just noting), so i wanted to start with the things i could confidently attest to. -mike