From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Orjan Friberg <orjan.friberg@axis.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Register fudging (CRISv32)
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:47:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040903134721.GA1028@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4138656F.9020001@axis.com>
On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 02:37:03PM +0200, Orjan Friberg wrote:
> My upcoming CRISv32 port (remote target, Linux based) is starting to
> look pretty good(*) but I'm left with a nagging feeling that the
> register fudging I'm doing isn't necessarily done where it should be
> and/or the right way. Right now it's being done in three different
> places (this relating to debugging user-mode programs):
>
> (1) in the kernel
> (2) in the Gdbserver
> (3) in GDB
>
> Basically, what I would like to hear is people's opinions on how various
> kinds of register fudging should be done.
>
> On to the details:
>
> * The first fudging is the equivalent to DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK, though
> it's not using that mechanism in GDB; instead it's being done in the
> kernel. On one hand I feel more comfortable doing it in the kernel
> where I know exactly what happens; on the other hand the decrementation
> needs to be duplicated in, for example, a classic kernel gdb stub.
> Should I be using DECR_PC_AFTER_BREAK in GDB instead? Or the
> implementation in the Gdbserver?
Up to you. I think doing it in the kernel stub and kernel ptrace
support is a better strategy, esp. if you have additional information
confirming that a breakpoint was hit.
> * Another fudging that takes place is the filling in of a pseudo-PC
> register (there is no actual PC register, so it's not present in struct
> pt_regs). This is being done in the Gdbserver. In addition, in case we
> stopped in a delay slot, I *may* need to look at the code to determine
> what the PC should be set to (meaning I can't rely on register contents
> alone). I've found 3 cases where this needs to be done:
>
> (1) In case of a stop (break, h/w watchpoint, receiving a signal etc)
> (2) When unwinding a sigtramp frame
> (3) When loading a core dump (supply_gregset)
>
> As of now, delay-slot-adjustment of the PC is only being done for the
> first case (normal stop), and it's also done in the Gdbserver. The
> other two cases don't handle being stopped in a delay slot yet, though I
> have a hunch this could be done in GDB.
There's arguments both ways for this. For instance, I think it would
be reasonable to do this in the kernel.
> * In addition to this, I need to set the h/w single-step PC to 0 in the
> kernel at various times, but I've seen other architectures doing that
> and I feel pretty confident that is the right way to do it.
Not sure what you mean by this.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-03 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-03 12:37 Orjan Friberg
2004-09-03 13:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2004-09-03 14:31 ` Orjan Friberg
2004-09-03 16:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-09-06 12:00 ` Orjan Friberg
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=20040903134721.GA1028@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=orjan.friberg@axis.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