Re: Are ppc*_elf_write_core_note Os-specific?

[Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:48:19AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> PowerPC64 glibc even now doesn't defing prstatus32_t.  :-(  It seems
> only sparc and s390 do so.  So PowerPC would need a
> hosts/powerpc-linux.h to define them for Linux, with some configury
> changes, like hosts/x86-64linux.h does for x86-64 Linux.  I'll see
> about making those changes.
> 
> Note that elf_backend_write_core_note is defined for x86-64, arm and
> aarch64 too.  The ARM and AARCH64 functions look to be completely
> redundant, and I suspect all of them could disappear if we modify the
> generic code to handle prstatusx32_t for x86-64.

Actually, there is a reason for the ARM and AARCH64 functions.
See https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-10/msg00202.html
Note the followup emails too..

So it seems that with the current infrastructure we can either support
core file generation on remote (linux) targets, or core file
generation on more native targets (freebsd).  Alternatively, we'd
need to use separate bfd target vectors for linux and freebsd, which
can and will cause multiple target matches.

Do we really want non-native core file generation?

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM