This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: compatibility between gdb and stub


The real problem here is that the Common Registers of PowerPC are not uniform across the chips. I think the only ones that can truly be said to be common are R0-R31,pc,msr,lr,ctr,flags The macros defined, assume a whole lot about what is common, that isn't.

And having written an "old stub" for the MPC860, I can confidently say that old stubs did not supply zeros where fpscr is, they didn't send anything as GDB did not expect anything.

Obviously there would need to be some understanding in the stub of what registers GDB used, but I fail to see that GDB is ever going to permenantly define a packet layout and stick to it.

Steven

No.  An old stub would supply zeros instead of "fpscr".

This is clumsy, but the 'qRegisters' packet should improve this behaviour :-)

qRegisters isn't a `silver bullet' :-/ The bottom line is that GDB and the stub need to agree to a packet layout and then stick to it.

Andrew





Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]