This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH, FT32] gdb and sim support
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: James Bowman <james dot bowman at ftdichip dot com>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:50:53 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, FT32] gdb and sim support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <ORIGINAL-RELEASE-1424557036-20150219070610 dot GI544 at vapier> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D1171BC0CB at glaexch1> <20150224045154 dot GE13523 at vapier> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D11722A513 at glaexch1> <20150317173615 dot GC7494 at adacore dot com> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D117232A0A at glaexch1> <20150319185452 dot GA14215 at vapier> <CA9BBF0458F83C4F9051448B941B57D117234A61 at glaexch1> <20150320124600 dot GA5273 at adacore dot com> <20150320154715 dot GI11803 at vapier>
> > > 2015-03-19 James Bowman <email@example.com>
> > >
> > > * sim-ft32.h: New file, FT32 simulator/GDB interface.
> > Shouldn't this part of the "sim" patch? (which means that the GDB
> > part would be conditional on the "sim" part being pushed first).
> only gdb uses this header to interface with the sim directly, so it could go
> either way
Doesn't the sim need that header too - I would think the point of
having the definitions be there would be to make sure that sim and
GDB are in sync?