RE: [Patch] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver

[Ajit Kumar Agarwal <ajit.kumar.agarwal@xilinx.com>]

Hello Pedro:

Just wanted to check  if the changes were Okay and there weren't any issues in it. 
Please let me know if it's  good to commit.

Thanks & Regards
Ajit

-----Original Message-----
From: Ajit Kumar Agarwal 
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:52 AM
To: 'Pedro Alves'; Michael Eager; Joel Brobecker
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Vinod Kathail; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
Subject: RE: [Patch] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver



-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Alves [mailto:palves@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 6:57 PM
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

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

The changes are incorporated.

>> +#define microblaze_breakpoint_len 4
>>
>> Use CAPS for macros.

The changes are incorporated.

>>+  (*the_target->read_memory) (where, (unsigned char *) &insn, 4);
>>+
>>+  if (insn == microblaze_breakpoint)

>>Why use the explicit length rather than the macro you just defined?
>>Why not use sizeof (insn)?

The changes are incorporated.

The below patch incorporated all the above feedbacks.

[PATCH] Microblaze: Port of Linux gdbserver

This patch is the port of Linux gdbserver.
Tested with gdb regression testsuite with this patch of gdbserver.

gdb/:
2014-10-18  Ajit Agarwal  <ajitkum@xilinx.com>

        * configure.tgt (build_gdbserver): New Definition.

gdb/gdbserver/:

        * gdbserver/Makefile.in (microblaze-linux.c): New target.
        * gdbserver/configure.srv (microblaze*-*-linux*): New target.
        * gdbserver/linux-microblaze-low.c: New file.

Signed-off-by:Ajit Agarwal ajitkum@xilinx.com

Gdb.base gdb testsuite is run and here is the status of gdb testsuite run for gdb.base.

                === gdb Summary ===

# of expected passes            7804
# of unexpected failures        2263
# of unexpected successes       2
# of expected failures          5
# of known failures             22
# of unresolved testcases       29
# of untested testcases         41
# of unsupported tests          125

Thanks & Regards
Ajit

Thanks,
Pedro Alves