Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@st.com>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Cc: ac131313@cygnus.com
Subject: [Fwd: Re: SH5 compact register numbering in gcc -> gdb interface]
Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 02:47:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CD8F3EC.1FE421BB@st.com> (raw)

Sorry, I forgot to copy this to the list.

-------- Original Message --------
Message-ID: <3CD820CD.9FC46E7F@st.com>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 19:45:33 +0100
From: Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@st.com>
Reply-To: joern.rennecke@st.com
Organization: SuperH UK Ltd.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.7-10 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ac131313@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: SH5 compact register numbering in gcc -> gdb interface
References: <3CCED903.294513BE@st.com>
<15568.36275.110744.510692@localhost.redhat.com> <3CD12BF8.7E1650C1@st.com>
<3CD80B1D.3020902@cygnus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

ac131313@cygnus.com wrote:
> Just FYI, the thing that controls the internal register layout of GDB is
> [currently] the remote protocol.  If you try to wire down GDB's internal
> register numbers to match the simulator, you'll likely break GDB's
> compatibility with existing remote targets.

Note, I'm not proposing to change the internal numbering for the SH1..SH4
targets, only for the SH5 target.
> 
> While this limitation is being worked on, it doesn't affect the GDB <->
> sim maping - that can already be adjusted independant of the other
> register numbering schema.

But should it?

The patches from Elena Zannoni only define one layout for SH5 registers,
which conflicts with the SH4 register layout.  So, currently, the register
layout in gdb is the same for simulator and remote targets for any given
SH processor.

I understand that we don't have much old tools to be
compatible with for SH5, so we can still change the interface.  And the
ambiguity issues that apply to the simulator interface apply as well
to remote targets, so I don't understand why you would require an
interface with unambigous register numbers for the simulator, while
rejecting it for remote targets.

-- 
--------------------------
SuperH
2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ
T:+44 1454 462330


             reply	other threads:[~2002-05-08  9:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-05-08  2:47 Joern Rennecke [this message]
2002-05-08 12:27 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-05-09  6:16   ` Joern Rennecke
2002-05-09 12:49     ` Andrew Cagney
2002-05-09 12:11 ` Andrew Cagney

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=3CD8F3EC.1FE421BB@st.com \
    --to=joern.rennecke@st.com \
    --cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
    --cc=gdb@sources.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