From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13078 invoked by alias); 29 May 2003 15:34:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13014 invoked from network); 29 May 2003 15:34:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 May 2003 15:34:11 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4TFYAH28978 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:34:10 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4TFYAI02704 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:34:10 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (IDENT:9ZxIlgj5PmAb3d56JL/soVrDMmxrMmW1@tooth.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.29]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4TFY7b16195 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:34:08 -0400 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id 300922C43D; Thu, 29 May 2003 11:39:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16086.10689.70706.173163@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:34:00 -0000 To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Cc: "Svein E. Seldal" , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Porting advice or documentation request In-Reply-To: <200305290949.h4T9nso00798@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> References: <3ED53E58.5070502@solidas.com> <200305290949.h4T9nso00798@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00388.txt.bz2 Richard Earnshaw writes: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm working on this new gdb port, and more than often I'm stuck. I have > > been told that the d10v port is the most authorative template for how > > new targets should be written. Unfortunately it is impossible to learn > > anything about the d10v's hardware architecture on the net, so I find it > > a bit difficult to template from. > > I can sympathise. I've tried on a couple of occasions to update the ARM > target to use the new interfaces and I've repeatedly run into situations > where the GDB's abstraction model is just not obvious from staring at the > code. > > Andrew, I think we really need a 10,000 ft view document on gdb's internal > architecture to complement the list of macros that a target can define... > > R. > I think checking out the new i386 frame branch could help here too. Mark updated the i386 to use the new frame stuff, so that could be used as example. elena