This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: PATCH for Re: mips-elf build fails
- From: Marko Mlinar <markom at opencores dot org>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, David Carlton <carlton at math dot stanford dot edu>
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 12:39:38 +0200
- Subject: Re: PATCH for Re: mips-elf build fails
- References: <ro1it04hpeb.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> <ro165w4ho9p.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> <20021014204759.GA10876@nevyn.them.org>
> > Well, to be specific, the line is
> >
> > if (HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT && STOPPED_BY_WATCHPOINT (ecs->ws))
> >
> > So it seems reasonable to assume that it's some sort of interation
> > between mips-elf and these patches:
> >
> > 2002-10-10 Marko Mlinar <markom@opencores.org>
> >
> > * infrun.c (resume): Convert #ifdef HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT into C,
> > accidentially not commited 2002-10-09
> > * gdbarch.h, gdbarch.c: Re-generate.
> >
> > 2002-10-09 Marko Mlinar <markom@opencores.org>
> >
> > * infrun.c (resume): Convert #ifdef HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT into C.
> > * gdbarch.sh (HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT): Add.
> > * gdbarch.h, gdbarch.c: Re-generate.
> >
> > In other words, I think it's HAVE_NONSTEPPABLE_WATCHPOINT rather than
> > STOPPED_BY_WATCHPOINT that's the problem.
>
> You're right.
>
> Marko, when you do something like this it is vital that you check
> existing definitions of the macro. It's defined to an empty string in
> a number of header files, which is fine for #ifdef. I've check this in
> to fix the build failures.
thanks for fixing it.
I have quite some TODO list with these kind of changes in order to put our
target in. Since I do not want to cause more trouble I would like to ask
somebody to help me with the global changes. Apparently you will have less
work this way anyway :)
The next step should be:
-----
>> > #define STEP_SKIPS_DELAY_P (1)
>> > #define STEP_SKIPS_DELAY(pc) (or1k_step_skips_delay (pc))
>
> what needs to be defined instead?
They need to be added to gdbarch.{sh,h,c}. That's a separate change.
See my post. For this, look at one of the ``F:'' (predicate) methods -
DO_REGISTERS_INFO.
-----
Any volounteers? :)
Marko