This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: AltiVec register ptrace support
- From: Kumar Gala <kumar dot gala at motorola dot com>
- To: Paul Mackerras <paulus at samba dot org>
- Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>, Kumar Gala <Kumar dot Gala at motorola dot com>, <linuxppc-dev at lists dot linuxppc dot org>, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>, <gdb at sources dot redhat dot com>, <ezannoni at cygnus dot com>, <fsirl at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 12:58:48 -0600 (CST)
- Subject: Re: AltiVec register ptrace support
Paul,
Can you please make a decision regarding which version (or both) of the
AltiVec ptrace support should go into the kernel.
The two patches are available here:
http://lists.linuxppc.org/linuxppc-dev/200112/msg00107.html
The change is holding up altivec support for gdb.
Thanks
- kumar
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Andrew Cagney writes:
>
> > The Linux/PPC kernel supports PEEK/POKE for fetching registers. The
> > proposed Kernel interface _consistently_ extends that interface using
> > the exact same mechanims to obtain the altivec regiters. All the
> > required changes for this have been posted and have been demonstrated to
> > work.
> >
> > Separate to that, it has been _proposed_ that the PPC ptrace() interface
> > be changed so that get/set reg for all register classes be added
> > (incomplete patch posted). Isn't this separate to the problem at hand?
>
> If we are going to add a get/set reg interface for the altivec vector
> registers, I would rather not extend the peek/poke interface to do
> that as well.
>
> Paul.
>