This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] W.I.P. AltiVec ppc registers support.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 07:42:51PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> Kevin Buettner writes:
> > On Nov 29, 6:03pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >
> > > >> Unfortunately not. I thought the same, until I remembered about core
> > > > > > file debugging. That function is called by fetch_core_registers() in
> > > > > > core-aout.c.
> > > > > > Hmm... I wonder if Linux/PPC even needs this function in core-aout.c.
> > > > > Daniel J. is the expert on this stuff. Daniel, doesn't Linux/PPC use
> > > > > core-regset.c instead?
> > > > > Whoops, yes, you are right. False alarm.
> > >
> > > So just the core code needs to have a hard-wired (non native header) way
> > > of unpacking Altivec registers (if they are found?)?
> >
> > I'm guessing we'll end up having to add fetch_core_registers() and
> > company to ppc-linux-nat.c. That way neither core-regset.c nor
> > core-aout.c will be used for a native Linux/PPC build. (See
> > fetch_core_registers() in i386-linux-nat.c as an example.)
>
> cross core file support: is that a concern?
For me, at least, it is. I should take this as motivation and finish
the cross core patches. I'm a little behind on them.
> Side bar: there is something interesting about the way the corelow.c
> file gets the registers sections from a core file. It looks for .reg
> (gregs), .reg2 (fpregs), and .reg-xfp (extended-floating point x86
> only(?)). Seems like I'll have to add a fetch section call for a
> .reg-altivec (or whatever it will be called, it's not produced
> yet). But that's in common code. I don't like it. This
> get_core_registers() will have to be overwritten too, maybe.
I'd rather make it support fetching arbitrary sections. I have the
design for this in mind already; I'll get back to you on it as soon as
I can (probably next week).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer