This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] ppc-linux-nat.c AltiVec regs ptrace
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 09:09:08PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 07:28:27PM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > > In case of 2.2.5 the powerpc version of the file gets installed. While
> > > for 2.2.1 the one with the definitions for PTRACE_GETFPXREGS is installed.
> > >
> > > Ok then, should we support the older version or not?
> > > If not we have two options:
> > >
> > > 1. if glibc gets a patch with the new PTRACE_GETVRREGS requests, then
> > > we can add another different configuration check.
> > >
> > > 2. We can just rely on the run time check. Which means I have to redo
> > > the patch again [where is that bucket].
> > >
> > > Actually doing just 2 would work also with the older version, I guess.
> > > Unless I am missing some other subtlety. Ok I'll change it.
> >
> > Sounds good to me. Might want to submit a patch to add GETVRREGS to
> > libc, also, I suppose...
>
> Yes, it's probably better.
>
> Here is a new patch.
>
> 2002-02-20 Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>
>
> * ppc-linux-nat.c (PTRACE_GETVRREGS, PTRACE_SETVRREGS): Define.
I like this much better, thank you!
My only concern is that you'll have a problem when glibc does define
them; might want to conditionally define these.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer