Re: Port to x86-64

Re: Port to x86-64

[Jiri Smid]

  Hi,

Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes:

> > 
> > 	o	submit the configury mess early
> > 
> > 		even if you don't have real code
> > 		could I suggest thinking about
> > 		separating this out so that
> > 		you can get on with the real
> > 		work.
> >

  Before I will submit the configury mess I would like to little discuss
about it. 
  The generic name of CPU is x86_64 in already ported software. It seems
that there shoud be create new config directory gdb/config/x86_64. But
this processor is extended i386 architecture and many parts of code will
be the same as in i386.
  I think that the best solution is to create this new config directory
x86_64 and from tm-x86_64.h include i386/tm-i386.h and redefine some
declarations. What do you think?

> > 
> > I also wonder if you actually need a separate CVS repository and
> > couldn't just live on a branch of the official GDB repository?  It
> > should make merging a lot easier.
> 
> Working on a branch might be the better idea.  Shall Jiri send his ssh
> key to you for setting this up?  Jiri, what do you prefer?
>
  I think that working on a branch is better too. Can I send ssh key? And
  where?

-- 
Jiri Smid

---------------------------------------------------------------------
SuSE CR, s.r.o.                                 e-mail: smid@suse.cz
Drahobejlova 27                                tel:+420 2 83095 373 
190 00 Praha 9                                 fax:+420 2 83095 374    
Ceska republika                                http://www.suse.cz      

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andrew Cagney]

Jiri Smid wrote:
> 
>   Hi,
> 
> Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes:
> 
> > >
> > >     o       submit the configury mess early
> > >
> > >             even if you don't have real code
> > >             could I suggest thinking about
> > >             separating this out so that
> > >             you can get on with the real
> > >             work.
> > >
> 
>   Before I will submit the configury mess I would like to little discuss
> about it.
>   The generic name of CPU is x86_64 in already ported software. It seems
> that there shoud be create new config directory gdb/config/x86_64. But
> this processor is extended i386 architecture and many parts of code will
> be the same as in i386.
>   I think that the best solution is to create this new config directory
> x86_64 and from tm-x86_64.h include i386/tm-i386.h and redefine some
> declarations. What do you think?

What convention, if any, was adopted by GCC and what do config.guess /
config.sub return?

I suspect that ``x86-64'' is going to be more acceptable than x86_64 a
file name.

	Andrew

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andreas Jaeger]

Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:

> Jiri Smid wrote:
> > 
> >   Hi,
> > 
> > Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes:
> > 
> > > >
> > > >     o       submit the configury mess early
> > > >
> > > >             even if you don't have real code
> > > >             could I suggest thinking about
> > > >             separating this out so that
> > > >             you can get on with the real
> > > >             work.
> > > >
> > 
> >   Before I will submit the configury mess I would like to little discuss
> > about it.
> >   The generic name of CPU is x86_64 in already ported software. It seems
> > that there shoud be create new config directory gdb/config/x86_64. But
> > this processor is extended i386 architecture and many parts of code will
> > be the same as in i386.
> >   I think that the best solution is to create this new config directory
> > x86_64 and from tm-x86_64.h include i386/tm-i386.h and redefine some
> > declarations. What do you think?
> 
> What convention, if any, was adopted by GCC and what do config.guess /
> config.sub return?

config.guess/config.sub return x86_64 since x86-64 would cause
problems since the "-" is special for config.

> I suspect that ``x86-64'' is going to be more acceptable than x86_64 a
> file name.

As filename, definitly.  For GCC the support is part of the i386
file.  For binutils, the assembler/dissassembler is shared with i386,
but we have also:
./bfd/elf64-x86-64.c
./include/elf/x86-64.h

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andreas Jaeger]

Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:

> Jiri Smid wrote:
> > 
> >  Hello,
> > 
> > My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR.
> > SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors.
> > I will work on port GDB.

If we do introductions here, let's continue: I'm one of the glibc
developers and port glibc to x86-64.  I might work in some parts
together with Jiri on gdb.

> This is good, really good - you've raised the flag early!
> 
> I can note/suggest the following:
> 
> 	o	get that assignment in order

I'll send assign.future and the company disclaimer to Jiri, I hope
that's all.  My papers are already ok, they've been filed last year.

> 		Remember, GDB can only accept the code
> 		if the copyright of the work is all
> 		in order.  It is best to start working
> 		on this one now so that you don't get
> 		hit with it at the end.
> 
> 		Part of this is ensuring that all
> 		people contributing to your GDB have
> 		a valid assignment in place.
> 
> 	o	submit the configury mess early
> 
> 		even if you don't have real code
> 		could I suggest thinking about
> 		separating this out so that
> 		you can get on with the real
> 		work.
> 
> 		This also avoids the age old
> 		problem of things going into
> 		a tail spin while people agree
> 		on the correct name :-)
> 
> 	o	Your code will need to use
> 		the multi-arch framework.
> 	o	You should watch out for
> 		the GNU coding standard.
> 		As they say, no pain, no gain :-)
> 
> I also wonder if you actually need a separate CVS repository and
> couldn't just live on a branch of the official GDB repository?  It
> should make merging a lot easier.

Working on a branch might be the better idea.  Shall Jiri send his ssh
key to you for setting this up?  Jiri, what do you prefer?

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andrew Cagney]

> Working on a branch might be the better idea.  Shall Jiri send his ssh
> key to you for setting this up?  Jiri, what do you prefer?

Just FYI, there is a bit of a dance to follow here.  To get access to
the CVS repository you need to do the following:

	o	have assignments et.al. in place

	o	have access to SSH

	o	demonstrate the ability
		to submit patches that follow
		both GDB's and the FSF conventions.

		I suggest starting with something
		small and mindless.

Among other things, this provides a mechanism through which new
contributors can publically and transparently establish their
credentials.

	Andrew

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andreas Jaeger]

jtc@redback.com (J.T. Conklin) writes:

> >>>>> "Jiri" == Jiri Smid <smid@suse.cz> writes:
> Jiri> My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR.
> Jiri> SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors.
> Jiri> I will work on port GDB.
> 
> Is there anything that you need from us?  

I think at this point not really, I'll guess that we'll contact you as
soon as we encounter specific problems.  

Btw. We will setup a separate CVS archive and use that for everything
and then merge to the mainline back.  Information about the x86-64
port is available at http://www.x86-64.org .

> It's better to keep the GDB maintainers informed as much as possible
> when it comes to a new port, as it will make integration of the port
> into the master sources considerably easier.  I believe Andrew has a
> short list of requirements a new ports must adhere to before a port 
> can be integrated that you might want to familiarize yourself with
> before getting too far along.

If there's such a list, then please point us to it.  If there's any
other guidance you can give Jiri, that's warmly welcome.

Thanks,
Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

Re: Port to x86-64

[Andrew Cagney]

Jiri Smid wrote:
> 
>  Hello,
> 
> My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR.
> SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors.
> I will work on port GDB.

This is good, really good - you've raised the flag early!

I can note/suggest the following:

	o	get that assignment in order

		Remember, GDB can only accept the code
		if the copyright of the work is all
		in order.  It is best to start working
		on this one now so that you don't get
		hit with it at the end.

		Part of this is ensuring that all
		people contributing to your GDB have
		a valid assignment in place.

	o	submit the configury mess early

		even if you don't have real code
		could I suggest thinking about
		separating this out so that
		you can get on with the real
		work.

		This also avoids the age old
		problem of things going into
		a tail spin while people agree
		on the correct name :-)

	o	Your code will need to use
		the multi-arch framework.

	o	You should watch out for
		the GNU coding standard.
		As they say, no pain, no gain :-)

I also wonder if you actually need a separate CVS repository and
couldn't just live on a branch of the official GDB repository?  It
should make merging a lot easier.

	Andrew

Port to x86-64

[Jiri Smid]

 Hello,

My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR.
SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors.
I will work on port GDB.

-- 
Jiri Smid

---------------------------------------------------------------------
SuSE CR, s.r.o.                                 e-mail: smid@suse.cz
Drahobejlova 27                                tel:+420 2 83095 373 
190 00 Praha 9                                 fax:+420 2 83095 374    
Ceska republika                                http://www.suse.cz      

Re: Port to x86-64

[J.T. Conklin]

>>>>> "Jiri" == Jiri Smid <smid@suse.cz> writes:
Jiri> My name is Jiri Smid and I work for SuSE CR.
Jiri> SuSE works on porting Linux to new 64-bit AMD processors.
Jiri> I will work on port GDB.

Is there anything that you need from us?  

It's better to keep the GDB maintainers informed as much as possible
when it comes to a new port, as it will make integration of the port
into the master sources considerably easier.  I believe Andrew has a
short list of requirements a new ports must adhere to before a port 
can be integrated that you might want to familiarize yourself with
before getting too far along.

        --jtc

-- 
J.T. Conklin
RedBack Networks