On 03/11/10 13:17, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 03:21:24AM +0000, Jonathan Larmour wrote: >> I think there's a more general issue here about whether it's expected to >> maintain support for existing working stub implementations such that they >> can be used as they have been used even when GDB is upgraded. Changing the >> interface with GDB remote stubs used to be a big no-no for GDB. > > In general, I want to keep existing stubs working. But someone who > has access to an affected stub needs to lend a hand here; I don't and > can't test anything. I believe I've now worked out a solution, and it's not that complicated in fact. See the attached patch. The key seems to be to let remote.c choose the tdesc. 2010-11-09 Jonathan Larmour * arm-tdep.c (arm_gdbarch_init): Allow M-profile targets' remote stubs to provide 'g' packets with or without FPA registers. > With stubs out there sending both FPA-regs+fake-CPSR and > FPA-regs+XPSR, I don't know how to make it work; in fact, I don't know > how FPA-regs+XPSR ever worked. It's clearly impossible to tell the difference between fake-CPSR and XPSR. But even an XML target description can't make that case work right, so I don't think that's too bad for us not to cope with. Unless you have some ideas (a 'set' option seems overkill). Jifl -- eCosCentric Limited http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos experts Barnwell House, Barnwell Drive, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 1223 245571 Registered in England and Wales: Reg No 4422071. ------["Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere"]------ Opinions==mine