Re: [RFC 2/5] xtensa: make configuration dynamic

["augustine dot sterling at gmail dot com" <augustine dot sterling at gmail dot com>]

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:10 AM, augustine.sterling@gmail.com
<augustine.sterling@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Now that XCHAL_* macros don't have to be preprocessor constants add
>> include/xtensa-dynconfig.h that defines them as fields of a structure
>> returned from the xtensa_get_config function.
>> Define that structure and fill it with default parameter values
>> specified in the include/xtensa-config.h.
>> Define reusable function xtensa_load_config that tries to load
>> configuration and return an address of an exported object from it.
>> Define the function xtensa_get_config that uses xtensa_load_config to
>> get structure xtensa_config, either dynamically configured or the
>> default.
>>
>> 2017-05-22  Max Filippov  <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
>> bfd/
>>         * Makefile.am (BFD32_BACKENDS, BFD32_BACKENDS_CFILES): Append
>>         xtensa-config.c.
>>         * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
>>         * configure: Regenerate.
>>         * configure.ac (xtensa_elf32_be_vec, xtensa_elf32_le_vec): Add
>>         xtensa-config.lo to the tb.
>>         * elf32-xtensa.c (xtensa-config.h): Replace #include with
>>         xtensa-dynconfig.h.
>>         * xtensa-config.c: New file.
>>
>> gas/
>>         * config/tc-xtensa.c (xtensa-config.h): Replace #include with
>>         xtensa-dynconfig.h.
>>         * config/tc-xtensa.h: Likewise.
>>         * config/xtensa-relax.c: Likewise.
>>
>> include/
>>         * xtensa-dynconfig.h: New file.
>>
>> ld/
>>         * Makefile.am (eelf32xtensa.c): Add $(INCDIR)/xtensa-dynconfig.h
>>         to the list of dependencies.
>>         * Makefile.in: Regenerate.
>>         * emultempl/xtensaelf.em (xtensa-config.h): Replace #include
>>         with xtensa-dynconfig.h.
>
> This is ok.

Actually, check that. I missed that this does both the refactoring
necessary to add a plugin mechanism and actually adds the plugin
mechanism.

So: This introduces a plugin mechanism to gdb and binutils. That needs
a higher-level discussion regarding licensing and plugin mechanisms
generally, but from the general maintainers of both binutils and gdb.

Would one of the general maintainers review this please?