From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Frysinger Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Blackfin: initial tracehook support Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:36:50 -0500 Message-ID: <8bd0f97a1002142336k9ffeekb8c81384252d2192@mail.gmail.com> References: <20100202185907.GE3630@lst.de> <1265881389-26925-2-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <20100211204653.34BB3900@magilla.sf.frob.com> <8bd0f97a1002111554ib69bd48rc3c5f4af65058281@mail.gmail.com> <20100212032406.BE645C81B@magilla.sf.frob.com> <8bd0f97a1002112033m5805d4eco3add4d5625e71e9@mail.gmail.com> <20100212204427.5F75CA18@magilla.sf.frob.com> <8bd0f97a1002130141v301af30av3ec51f065656b65f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f179.google.com ([209.85.211.179]:62392 "EHLO mail-yw0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755026Ab0BOHhN convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:37:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8bd0f97a1002130141v301af30av3ec51f065656b65f@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Roland McGrath Cc: Christoph Hellwig , oleg@redhat.com, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 04:41, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 15:44, Roland McGrath wrote: >> Moreover, the usual cleanup is to make your arch_ptrace() use >> copy_regset_from_user() and copy_regset_to_user() to implement exist= ing >> calls ike PTRACE_GETREGS. =C2=A0That way, existing ptrace users (str= ace, gdb) >> become tests of the user_regset paths (some of them). unfortunately the Blackfin ports of both gdb and strace do not use the PTRAGE_{G,S}ETREGS interfaces. so i had to port both in order to test out the new code. > OK, this should be doable. =C2=A0are there any guidelines for what sh= ould > be in a specific regset ? =C2=A0the Blackfin processor does not have = a FPU, > so the only set i have defined atm is the "general" set and that is > exactly the same as the current set of ptrace registers. =C2=A0this i= s also > what the current PTRACE_{G,S}ETREGS operates on (struct pt_regs). going by the gdb code, all i really need to worry about is the "general" set and have that be the same as pt_regs today i have one or two small things to check out, but i think we should be all set now thanks to your help -mike