From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27851 invoked by alias); 7 May 2005 05:41:04 -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 27466 invoked from network); 7 May 2005 05:40:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 May 2005 05:40:59 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DUI3a-000897-Tt; Sat, 07 May 2005 01:40:54 -0400 Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 05:41:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Schlie Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Available registers as a target property Message-ID: <20050507054054.GA31247@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Schlie , gdb@sourceware.org References: <20050507043029.GA29449@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 12:53:48AM -0400, Paul Schlie wrote: > - actually arm "extensible architecture" is fairly rigid, and arguably > far less "customizable" than those offered by ARC or Tensilica for > example; and is likely best characterized as being extended via > co-processor extensions not an innate extension/customization of the > arm ISA or processor implementation core architecture itself. ... which GDB also needs to support. > > ARM's approach to this problem was to encapsulate the description > > in the module server, which is distributed with the target > > configuration. Anything that wants the configuration can query the > > target for it. That seems a lot more useful to me - rather than > > centralizing the registry, distribute it locally to every target it > > describes. > > - so you propose that GNU tools adopt a reliance on a proprietary vendor > data base "module server" in order to configure tools to support that > vendors proprietary licensed architecture? Please limit yourself to constructive comments instead of accusations; it's apparent that you aren't familiar with RDI (not surprising, since I don't believe the documentation is publicly available), and that you haven't really thought about what I'm suggesting. Hint: all the necessary information can be provided by gdbserver, and will be. Linux KGDB stubs also have enough information to provide this data, and hopefully will once GDB supports it. I'm sure some free software simulation systems will also. We've gotten way off topic at this point. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC