This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
RE: [PATCH] [ARC] Pass arc_opcode to GDB as an architecture specific data
- From: Claudiu Zissulescu <Claudiu dot Zissulescu at synopsys dot com>
- To: Anton Kolesov <Anton dot Kolesov at synopsys dot com>, Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Francois Bedard <Francois dot Bedard at synopsys dot com>, Cupertino Miranda <Cupertino dot Miranda at synopsys dot com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 12:59:35 +0000
- Subject: RE: [PATCH] [ARC] Pass arc_opcode to GDB as an architecture specific data
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1475256804-22812-1-git-send-email-Anton.Kolesov@synopsys.com> <CAH=s-PNSB_GQ51_-xrSWd5Ngk3Z+ic5PrYhgVWqzNESTgZuytQ@mail.gmail.com> <39A54937CC95F24AA2F794E2D2B66B13581BF710@DE02WEMBXB.internal.synopsys.com>
> That's what I wanted to get - something similar to aarch64_decode_insn, but
> ARC binutils developers didn't wanted to do things this way, and told me
> instead to use arc_get_disassembler() which returns pointer to a
> print_insn_arc(). Given the imposed constraints, I've preferred to do this
> one-line change to binutils and put the rest of instruction decoding in
> the GDB proper, to minimize binutils changes. arc_opcode itself is bit
> problematic in this context because it is optimized for instruction printing
> and not for instruction analysis, but it is still much better than trying to
> write disassembler from the scratch
Maybe the best is to come with a proper binutils patch and move the gdb mods into arc-dis.c.
Any contribution is welcome,
Claudiu