From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27678 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2002 21:18:16 -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 27671 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 21:18:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 21:18:15 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18IdMB-0001dG-00; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:18:35 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18IbU3-0003MI-00; Sun, 01 Dec 2002 16:18:35 -0500 Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 13:18:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: James Sampson Cc: Andrew Cagney , GDB Archive Subject: Re: Porting GDB - Where to start? Message-ID: <20021201211835.GA12876@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: James Sampson , Andrew Cagney , GDB Archive References: <20021126161957.163F22DEF4@postfix2.ofir.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021126161957.163F22DEF4@postfix2.ofir.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:53:15PM +0100, James Sampson wrote: > >> 1. Why is xstormy16 the best place to start?. > > > >Being fairly new, and for a relatively straightforward architecture, it > >doesn't come with much baggage. It's roughly 1000 lines long, while the > >MIPS is a wopping 6000 lines! > > Ok! - I had the impression it had more than 200Kb of source code. Is it > because a lot of the code is similar from target to target, and doesn't need > much change? (I assume you mean a 1000 lines of code which has to be more or > less produced) > > > >> 2. Since I can't use GCC to make target specific code for a C55x I must use > >> CCS (Code Composer Studio) from TI. What could a "got-ya" be?. > > > >There is a good chance that after you've kind of got the target `mostly' > >working, you will spend time debugging problems in the symtab code. > >This is because, when it comes to debug info, no two compilers are > >alike. Consequently, is a very good chance that GDB won't properly > >handle the debug info being output by this compiler. > > > >Anyway, a first step is to find out what the debug info is and if GDB > >has any support for it at all .... One way is to compile a simple > >program using `-g -S' and then look at the assembler that is created. > >If it contains ``.stabn'' lines its stabs, if it contains ``.debug_...'' > >symbols it's dwarf2 (or dwarf1?). Beyond that, you may want to post the > >contents here. > > In CCS you have the option to use COFF or DWARF. I was planning on using COFF, > because I have noticed some C54x COFF file thingies in the BFD, which could be > usable :-D. Do you know if they are?. If those are the two switches that's pretty bizarre. COFF is a file format, DWARF a debug info format. You probably want DWARF (DWARF-2) which implies ELF format files. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer