From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88753 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2018 16:14:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 88665 invoked by uid 89); 7 Aug 2018 16:14:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,LIKELY_SPAM_BODY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=advertising, guy, personal X-HELO: mail-wr1-f54.google.com Received: from mail-wr1-f54.google.com (HELO mail-wr1-f54.google.com) (209.85.221.54) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:14:08 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-f54.google.com with SMTP id h14-v6so16281890wrw.13 for ; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 09:14:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sifive.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=y05btr1Q3ouaw5R/xz0RoSm9U4YsAiuPoMKSpJGry8Q=; b=QbHlRl+fhm0IMrYJ4NWl3IDJ+cv5rSE55efybUHN17ZYKX/oCInBShSPrusLyhRgMi BunphQzOL/v0QLAQ4okeYeEX0MESIF2OBo2nvCD7b9sO2xda0WlfI6g2jM6mNlgL5V/+ u6mHfX2OhGHYxKjWr8EJkQn73BwzFYUWlX+ec7EJgG6jcCejrHX945RS7oF+TnpN/5AA GVOInzSi/Y817HO/YBWUPxaAYDD87umeHlcKfGRUbR3dlwpfqDjBE5nLGeiiXSBYOl8p 5Rjl7OFOOCPPaSmjwop4LEuRagUSAgWUC6qbljsqh7902Z7fFPvfzoBEOVIHj3GWmAmJ ZRMA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:adf:e44b:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:14:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180807130122.GI2432@adacore.com> References: <20180807130122.GI2432@adacore.com> From: Jim Wilson Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:14:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: contributing the RISC-V linux native port To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00019.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:01 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > I don't think we have a specific guideline for this; my opinion is > that you don't have to wait for something to be perfect before you > can submit it for inclusion. What you want to ask yourself is, > assuming your patch is improving things already (and therefore > being helpful to you and probably others), does it have a cost > elsewhere? For instance, will it make harder to fix something later, > or does it break something else, etc? If, as is often the case, > you find that the code is self contained and doesn't hurt anything > else, why not submit it already, so others can benefit from it? > As long as the code passes the coding standards, I don't see how > it could hurt. I don't expect that my patches will cause any problems. My patch is improving things for me already. I've been able to use gdb to debug binutils, gcc, and gdb issues. But I'm a command line guy, and don't use any fancy gdb features, so I'm not sure how it will work for others. I've been advertising my personal github tree on riscv mailing lists and irc, but haven't gotten any direct feedback yet. I did get some indirect feedback in the form of a glibc patch from Andreas Schwab so I suspect that he has tried it. My tree is at https://github.com/jim-wilson/riscv-linux-native-gdb if anyone wants to look at it. See the README.md file. I'll work on a patch set for submission. Jim