This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 14 Mar 2015 10:23, Jiri Gaisler wrote: > On 14/03/15 08:45, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 13 Mar 2015 09:24, Jiri Gaisler wrote: > >> On 13/03/15 00:55, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>> On 12 Mar 2015 22:25, Jiri Gaisler wrote: > >>>> On 02/03/15 02:13, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>>>>> +#ifdef HOST_LITTLE_ENDIAN > >>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < (count / 4); i++) wbuffer[i] = ntohl(wbuffer[i]); // endian swap > >>>>>>> +#endif > >>>>> > >>>>> sim-endian.h already provides a lot of helper funcs that i'm pretty sure you > >>>>> can use here. > >>>> > >>>> I don't understand why ntohl() is a problem. It is a common Posix function > >>>> that converts big endian to host endian, exactly what is needed. Using > >>>> sim-endian.h pulls in a lot of the sim-*.c files due to dependencies and > >>>> makes the simulator larger than necessary .... > >>> > >>> "network" has no meaning here. using it as a proxy for moving between big > >>> endian and native endian when there are clear functions that the sim has > >>> standardized on isn't correct. your code also (1) requires duplicating branches > >>> and (2) inline preprocessor checks. it also does not properly handle bi-endian > >>> builds. sim-endian does all of these for you. the whole point of common/ is > >>> to delete code from each sim rather than open coding it everywhere. > >>> > >>> wrt size, i don't think that's a compelling argument. we're talking units of > >>> KiB here, and i can't even count that low :P. > >>> > >>> if you're having trouble converting the build over (compiling/linking errors), > >>> then we can discuss that. but it'd be a matter of "do we do it now or later" > >>> rather than "do we do ever convert". > >> > >> Right. I tried to use the T2H_4 macro, but can't get it to compile. > >> I included <sim-basics.h> and added sim-endian.o and sim-io.o to the > >> Makefile, but it complains about unresolved function etc. Do I really > >> need to create a sim-main.c and sim-main.h just to use T2H? > > > > i've pushed a patch to bury the sim-io.h include in sim-assert.h (since that's > > the header that actually uses the sim_io_xxx funcs). if you define your own > > ASSERT/SIM_ASSERT macros, it should be avoided for now. just make sure you add > > a note that they should get converted to sim-assert.h at some point. > > I'm not sure this helps. sim-endian.c includes sim-assert.h, so I get the > same problem even after your patch: > > gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DPROFILE=1 -DWITH_PROFILE=-1 -DWITH_HOST_BYTE_ORDER=LITTLE_ENDIAN -DDEFAULT_INLINE=0 -DFAST_UART -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../.. -I. -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32 -I../common > -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../common -I../../include -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../../include -I../../bfd -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../../bfd -I../../opcodes > -I../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../../opcodes -g -O2 -static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc -o run \ > run.o libsim.a ../../bfd/libbfd.a ../../opcodes/libopcodes.a ../../libiberty/libiberty.a -ltermcap -ldl -lz -lnsl ../../readline/libreadline.a -ltermcap -lm > libsim.a(sim-endian.o): In function `offset_1': > /home/jiri/src/gdb/v4/sim/erc32/../../../../../ibm/src/gdb/binutils-gdb/sim/erc32/../common/sim-n-endian.h:145: undefined reference to `sim_io_error' did you define ASSERT/SIM_ASSERT before including sim-endian.h ? -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |