From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22890 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2004 06:19:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22796 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2004 06:19:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO alice.acmet.com) (61.11.104.16) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Mar 2004 06:19:35 -0000 Received: from ARAMESH (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alice.acmet.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2K6DD806578 for ; Sat, 20 Mar 2004 11:43:14 +0530 From: "A.Ramesh" To: Subject: Clarfication about 'Badvaddr' cp0 register in Tx39 Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:47:00 -0000 Message-ID: <000001c40e42$212f60c0$7b00a8c0@acme> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00191.txt.bz2 Hi, I am using the gdb6.0 port for tx39. I am seeking one clarification related to Coprocessor registers. I have tried to produce 'Address Error Exception' and verify the behavior of coprocessor registers. As per specification, there is a 'Badvaddr' register, which takes the address whose access had caused the Exception. After getting this exception, I couldn't get any changes on 'bad' register in the DDD's 'Register window'. Later I found, while debugging, that there are two locations in gdb which are maintaining cp0 registers. 1) cpu->registers [REGISTERS] 2) cpu->cp0_gpr [CP0_GPR] 'Badvaddr' is implemented using 'cpu->cp0_gpr' in interp.c. 'cpu' is the type of structure _sim_cpu. This structure has been declared in sim-main.h But, Gdb6.0 provides user interface for only those cp0 registers which are maintained at 'cpu->registers'. This means, if we change the value in [REGISTERS] array, that will reflect in the DDD's 'Register window'. So should I allocate the place for 'BadVaddr' in [REGISTERS], so that I can see the behavior of any exception ? Or How do I link [CPO_GPR] with user interface ? Thanks & Regards, A.Ramesh