From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8767 invoked by alias); 20 May 2003 20:37:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 8671 invoked from network); 20 May 2003 20:37:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mms2.broadcom.com) (63.70.210.59) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 May 2003 20:37:27 -0000 Received: from 63.70.210.1 by mms2.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (MMS v5.5.2)); Tue, 20 May 2003 13:34:09 -0700 Received: from mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com [10.16.128.236]) by mon-irva-11.broadcom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA19573; Tue, 20 May 2003 13:37:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com (dt-sj3-118 [10.21.64.118]) by mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/SSF) with ESMTP id h4KKbJov014816; Tue, 20 May 2003 13:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cgd@localhost) by dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com ( 8.9.1/SJ8.9.1) id NAA07765; Tue, 20 May 2003 13:37:18 -0700 (PDT) To: kevinb@redhat.com cc: ac131313@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [WIP/RFC] MIPS registers overhaul References: <1030510002453.ZM3880@localhost.localdomain> <3EBD6131.30209@redhat.com> <1030514220025.ZM10373@localhost.localdomain> <3EC461C1.1080104@redhat.com> <1030516230550.ZM12582@localhost.localdomain> <1030517004052.ZM13153@localhost.localdomain> From: cgd@broadcom.com Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 20:37:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: kevinb@redhat.com's message of "Sat, 17 May 2003 00:41:10 +0000 (UTC)" Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 12D44ECB942103-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00372.txt.bz2 At Sat, 17 May 2003 00:41:10 +0000 (UTC), "Kevin Buettner" wrote: > Unfortunately, it isn't reasonable to use an ABI-specific RDA to debug > an application which uses a different ABI. It might kind of, sort of > work some of the time, but there are various things that won't work. > You've just identified one of the problems. BTW, because of this kind of problem, does it even make sense that when talking to a mips64 kernel but using an o32 rda (or gdbserver 8-), you'd use a "mips64" protocol? I.e., why wouldn't it just use the 32-bit mips protocol, since from you're debugging a 32-bit binary with a 32-bit debugging daemon... Yeah, the kernel's 64 bits, but that's pretty much irrelevant... cgd