Re: gdb-h8-stub

[Alexei Minayev <aminayev@yahoo.com>]

Hi Daniel,

thanks for an interesting discussion.

--- Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 11:25:50AM -0700, Alexei Minayev wrote:
> > X200000
> > M0,15:...    ; (this would actually mean 0x200000 to 0x200015)
> > M15,15:...
> > M30,15:...
> > ...
> > 
> > So according to this, the stub *must* read the address from the X command
and
> > store it for future memory operations, even if it doesn't support binary
> > downloads. 
> > In your opinion, is that what gdb means?
> 
> No, what I'm trying to say is that that's the wrong behavior for the
> client.  You'll need to figure out why GDB is doing this.
> 
it might have been the wrong behavior for the client... but it's a very
standard client code, working in many stubs. 
The stub code, in particular, when parsing an 'M' command, is looking for an
*absolute* address. But the gdb sends relative addresses to him.
I mean, what could the client possibly say wrong, that gdb chooses a totally
different way of communication?

I went ahead and implemented binary downloading. 
Still:
X200000,0...Ack
X0,4e...Ack           (I'd expect X200000,4e here)
Packet received: OK
X4e,4e...Ack          (expected: X20004e,4e)
Packet received: OK
and so on.

Address is *relative* to what comes in the first packet. E.g. the second
packet gdb sends is "X0", which means "0 bytes +0x200000 base", and the base
value was in the first packet.

Am I forgetting some option or variable?
Thanks

> -- 
> Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
> MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

Regards -- Alexei

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com