From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: toddpw@wrs.com (Todd Whitesel) To: shebs@cygnus.com (Stan Shebs) Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com (GDB Developers) Subject: Re: Testsuite Organization Proposal Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:03:00 -0000 Message-id: <199906150003.RAA18448@alabama.wrs.com> References: <199906142351.QAA06182@andros.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q2/msg00164.html > I'd like to propose a semi-formalization of the current testsuite > organization, basically just reflecting current practice, but with > enough precision to guide further additions. The testsuite is key for I think anything along these lines is a MARVELOUS idea. Might there be cookbook instructions for isolating a single test out of the testsuite and running it manually? Anyone hoping to do more than 'make check' pretty much needs to know how to do this. I tried asking some gcc people for help on this, but they quickly gave up, claiming the gcc/gdb testsuites were structured unlike each other and that they wouldn't be able to help me. -- Todd Whitesel toddpw @ wrs.com >From shebs@cygnus.com Mon Jun 14 17:12:00 1999 From: Stan Shebs To: toddpw@wrs.com Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: Testsuite Organization Proposal Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:12:00 -0000 Message-id: <199906150012.RAA06502@andros.cygnus.com> References: <199906150003.RAA18448@alabama.wrs.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q2/msg00165.html Content-length: 996 From: toddpw@wrs.com (Todd Whitesel) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:03:49 -0700 (PDT) Might there be cookbook instructions for isolating a single test out of the testsuite and running it manually? Anyone hoping to do more than 'make check' pretty much needs to know how to do this. I tried asking some gcc people for help on this, but they quickly gave up, claiming the gcc/gdb testsuites were structured unlike each other and that they wouldn't be able to help me. Running a single file is easy: cd /gdb/testsuite make check RUNTESTFLAGS='bitfields.exp logical.exp' I think DejaGNU actually allows full regexps as arguments for finding which test files to run, I haven't experimented much myself. Don't think there's any way to run a single test in a file, there's usually a bunch of setup to get to a particular test. In fact, I would want to keep .exp files down in size so that it's not too slow to run just one of them, 50-100 tests/file or so. Stan >From tm@netcom.com Mon Jun 14 17:24:00 1999 From: Toshiyasu Morita To: jtc@redback.com Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: breakpoint extension for remote protocol, take II Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:24:00 -0000 Message-id: <199906150023.RAA14961@netcom16.netcom.com> References: <5mzp222x5d.fsf@jtc.redbacknetworks.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q2/msg00166.html Content-length: 729 > > >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Cagney writes: > Andrew> Have you considered what to do when there is a choice of > Andrew> software breakpoints? Jim Ingham's pointed out to me that in > Andrew> the case of the MIPS/MIPS16 and ARM/THUMB the breakpoint might > Andrew> be 2 bytes or 4 bytes in size (and the value different in each > Andrew> case). > > I was unaware processors with multiple software breakpoints existed. > I assume that the 2 byte breakpoint instructions have to be inserted > in "high-density" code segments and 4 byte breakpoints insns have to > be inserted in "low-density" segments. Is there a four-byte sequence which is an illegal instruction in both MIPS16 and MIPS32 modes? Toshi >From jtc@redback.com Mon Jun 14 17:34:00 1999 From: jtc@redback.com (J.T. Conklin) To: Stan Shebs Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: breakpoint extension for remote protocol, take II Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:34:00 -0000 Message-id: <5mvhcq2tg7.fsf@jtc.redbacknetworks.com> References: <199906142359.QAA06291@andros.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1999-q2/msg00167.html Content-length: 1751 >>>>> "Stan" == Stan Shebs writes: Stan> Bleh. But that's what the 'q' escape is for. IMO, all Stan> experimental protocol extensions should be using 'q'; Stan> likewise, GDB should never use 'q' itself. Stan> Stan> You mean like with qOffsets, that's been standardly issued by Stan> GDB for years? :-) Stan> Stan> Actually, I don't ever remember hearing that 'q' was supposed to Stan> be experimental, and the existing docs don't seem to say so Stan> either. Although I've had that (mis-)interpretation for years, you are right. There is nothing that indicates that that 'q' is intended to be used for experimental commands. Stan> At this point we would have to pick a different char I Stan> think, and be very disciplined about not allowing any usages of Stan> it into the standard sources, so that it really can be for Stan> experimentation. Agreed. I'll try to weasel out of this mistake by arguing that there *should* be letter reserved for experimental, and other non-standard commands. The remote protocol is used beyond the cannonical implementations of remote.c and the sample stubs provided with GDB. Since the protocol is relatively simple, it's not surprising that it has been extended. And without a well developed specification and/or an organization to register protocol extensions, it's not surprising that there have been or could be collisions in those extensions. Stan> In general, we have a sizeable documentation gap with the remote Stan> protocol; it's become so ubiquitous it ought to have its own Stan> RFC... :-) Agreed again. Even if the remote protocol is replaced with something better :-), the old protocol won't go away for a long while. --jtc -- J.T. Conklin RedBack Networks >From brendan@dgs.monash.edu.au Mon Jun 14 17:42:00 1999 From: Brendan Simon To: Zubin Burjor Sethna Cc: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: gdb + wiggler Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 17:42:00 -0000 Message-id: <3765A0D6.B8B414F6@dgs.monash.edu.au> References: <6006B52C37ABD211AB0900805FFE9D7916933C@exchange.sg.adisys.com.au> X-SW-Source: 1999-q2/msg00168.html Content-length: 577 Zubin Burjor Sethna wrote: > Hi > > Has anyone had any success using the gdb from the ecos tool chain with a > wiggler? A wiggler is a debugging interface for BDM and the target I am > using is MPC860? I tried the wiggler support in the ecos gdb but all I got > were core dumps. Do I need any additonal drivers than what is supplied with > gdb? > > Thanks > > Zubin YES. You need the wigglers.dll. You can get it as part of the demo utilities from the macraigor web site. It only works with MS-Windows unfortunately. No Linux/Unix as far as I am aware :( Brendan Simon.