From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Dave Kleikamp Subject: Re: [RFC:PATCH 00/03] powerpc: Expose BookE debug registers through extended ptrace interface Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:07:56 -0200 References: <20091210155709.6697.4635.sendpatchset@norville.austin.ibm.com> <1260498456.4329.8.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1260498456.4329.8.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <200912111807.56262.bauerman@br.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev list , Sergio Durigan Junior , Torez Smith , David Gibson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri 11 Dec 2009 00:27:36 Dave Kleikamp wrote: > On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 20:23 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > > #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_INSN_BP_RANGE 0x1 > > > #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_INSN_BP_MASK 0x2 > > > #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_DATA_BP_RANGE 0x4 > > > #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_DATA_BP_MASK 0x8 > > > > Is GDB smart enough to deal w/no condition_regs? On some Book-E > > devices we have 2 IACs, 2 DACs, and 0 DVCs. Does it need to be in the > > features? > > I had discussed it with the gdb team. I could easily add a feature > flag, but it would be equivalent to num_condition_regs > 0. I don't > have a strong opinion either way. The current GDB code we have here uses num_condition_regs > 0 to discover if DVCs are supported, so a PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE constant for that is redundant IMHO. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center