From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Delay the branch for E500 native support
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 22:40:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040702224047.GA21295@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vt2k6xm82qs.fsf@zenia.home>
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 05:26:35PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to delay the GDB 6.2 branch for another week,
> until Fri, July 9th?
>
> It would be really nice for 6.2 to contain full, unqualified native
> PowerPC E500 Linux support. We're really close. The bulk of it is
> committed and working. The two missing pieces are that you can't
> access the E500's vector registers in multi-threaded programs, and you
> can't refer to variables located in vector registers, because of GCC's
> use of DW_OP_piece. I've posted patches to address the first problem,
> which are being discussed for revision, and I'm working on patches for
> the second issue, revised as discussed in the thread at:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-05/msg00425.html
DW_OP_piece will presumably be a substantial change. While I'd love to
see it in GDB 6.2:
(A) A week before the branch is not a good time for huge new
features.
(B) it can be merged after the branch is cut, once it is known to
work on HEAD and has been tested - in fact this is probably preferable
to committing before the branch.
The vector register stuff I have no comments about, since it's not
going to affect other targets in the same way. That's an even better
candidate for committing to the branch after branching.
> I'm happy to put in time over the U.S. holiday weekend, and do what it
> takes next week to get it all posted for further review by midweek.
> If maintainers can give me detailed instructions on how they want the
> patches revised, I'll be happy to comply.
>
> I'd just really like to be able to say, in the GDB 6.2 NEWS: "Added
> support for native PowerPC E500 Linux", without qualifications.
I would really have liked for GDB 6.1 to contain inter-compilation-unit
reference support too. If the timing doesn't work out, it doesn't work
out - if the schedule holds there may even be another release this
year.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-02 22:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-02 22:27 Jim Blandy
2004-07-02 22:40 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2004-07-03 9:28 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-07-04 6:14 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-07-04 19:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-07-03 11:45 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-07-03 21:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-07-06 17:22 ` Jim Blandy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040702224047.GA21295@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox