From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42251385E830 for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 17:25:12 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 42251385E830 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark@simark.ca Received: from [172.16.0.95] (192-222-181-218.qc.cable.ebox.net [192.222.181.218]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AEC221E76A; Fri, 22 May 2020 13:25:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: apply patch to avr-gdb to be able to debug on assembler level To: Christo Crause , Klaus Rudolph Cc: gdb@sourceware.org References: From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <234fc85f-1844-9dc7-277a-aaaa61c320e5@simark.ca> Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 13:25:09 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: tl Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 17:25:13 -0000 On 2020-05-22 12:39 p.m., Christo Crause via Gdb wrote: > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 4:06 PM Klaus Rudolph wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I today run into a well known problem with avr-gdb. >> There is already a patch provided within the bug report. >> >> >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13519 >> > > Indeed, the curious case of the apparently straight-forward fix that hasn't > been applied. Is there actually a maintainer for the AVR port? > > On the flip side this bug forced me to figure out how to patch and build > avr-gdb myself. > Hi, I saw the activity on the bug report yesterday. It's unfortunate, but if you want something to progress, you just need to ping it now and then, otherwise it just gets buried in the volume of emails and patches. If the patch was sent in 2016 and hasn't seen any activity since, there's no real change that some GDB maintainer will pick it up, review it, test it and merge it out of nowhere (unless they need it themselves). And indeed, there's isn't a maintainer dedicated to AVR in GDB, so that doesn't help. I would like to see this merged, so I'm working on getting at least a bit of the GDB testsuite running against simavr. If that works well enough, at least we'll get some confidence that this change doesn't break some other use case. Simon