This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] ppc-linux-nat.c AltiVec regs ptrace
Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 09:09:08PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 07:28:27PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > > > In case of 2.2.5 the powerpc version of the file gets installed. While
> > > > for 2.2.1 the one with the definitions for PTRACE_GETFPXREGS is installed.
> > > >
> > > > Ok then, should we support the older version or not?
> > > > If not we have two options:
> > > >
> > > > 1. if glibc gets a patch with the new PTRACE_GETVRREGS requests, then
> > > > we can add another different configuration check.
> > > >
> > > > 2. We can just rely on the run time check. Which means I have to redo
> > > > the patch again [where is that bucket].
> > > >
> > > > Actually doing just 2 would work also with the older version, I guess.
> > > > Unless I am missing some other subtlety. Ok I'll change it.
> > >
> > > Sounds good to me. Might want to submit a patch to add GETVRREGS to
> > > libc, also, I suppose...
> >
> > Yes, it's probably better.
> >
> > Here is a new patch.
> >
> > 2002-02-20 Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> >
> > * ppc-linux-nat.c (PTRACE_GETVRREGS, PTRACE_SETVRREGS): Define.
>
> I like this much better, thank you!
>
> My only concern is that you'll have a problem when glibc does define
> them; might want to conditionally define these.
Oh, yes, true.
Will do when I check it in.
Thanks for your help.
Elena
>
> --
> Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
> MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer