From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31583 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2014 13:27:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 31570 invoked by uid 89); 15 Oct 2014 13:27:23 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:27:22 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9FDRGuO007860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:27:16 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9FDRD4X008157; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:27:13 -0400 Message-ID: <543E7630.5060001@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:27:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal , Michael Eager , Joel Brobecker CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , Vinod Kathail , Vidhumouli Hunsigida , Nagaraju Mekala Subject: Re: [Patch] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver References: <25de23b98e054fd291ea232d10f2800c@BN1BFFO11FD018.protection.gbl> <5436B7D0.9060004@eagercon.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00386.txt.bz2 On 10/09/2014 07:54 PM, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote: > > Pedro: >> > Did this kernel port make it upstream without PTRACE_GETREGSET? >> > If there's support for that, can you please switch to using it? >>> >>Please answer all questions. > Sure. The Kernel code(ptrace.h) for Microblaze doesn't have upstream code without PTRACE_GETREGSET. > > Pedro: >> > PTRACE_GETREGS is supposed to an old way of doing things... >>> >>And address all comments. > The Microblaze Kernel code PTRACE_GETREGS is always defined and there is no conditional compilation which is without the PTRACE_GETREGS. So I agree with Pedro comment of not using #ifdef PTRACE_GETREGS and in the patch submitted I have removed if #ifdef PTRACE_GETREGS which is not required. PTRACE_GETREGSET != PTRACE_GETREGS I'm asking for using the PTRACE_GETREGSET instead of PTRACE_GETREGS in new ports. See background here: https://sourceware.org/ml/archer/2010-q3/msg00193.html Thanks, Pedro Alves