Re: [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs and little-endian breakpoint

[Michael Eager <eager at eagerm dot com>]

On 05/22/14 10:58, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> Thanks  Joel for the review comments. Will make sure to consider your suggestions
>   when Submitting the new patches.

Please don't top post.  Please trim your responses so they don't contain
multiple copies of the same text.

> Based on the feedback, the updated patch is given below.
>
> Okay for the upstream?

An OK would only be appropriate if you had write access to the repository.

>      [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs
>
>      This patch add the support of slr and shr regs and also solves the problem

also?  Is there another unmentioned problem?

>      related to process_g_packet where the buf_len > 2 * rsa->sizeof_g_packet
>      and throwing the Error that 'g' packet message reply is too long. This is
>      because the buf_len calculated in the init_remote_state function for
>      microblaze target is based On the sizeof_g_packet and remote_packet_size
>      and the memory_packet_config->size. The sizeof_g_packet is 236 because the
>      number of reg num is 59 and 2* sizeof_g_packet comes to 472 .With shr and
>      shl entry and the buf_len is 472. This does not match the greater than
>      conditional statement  and works fine. Without shr and shl entry,the
>      sizeof_g_packets comes to 57*4 *2 = 456.  This doesn't match the criteria
>      in the process_g_packet function  leading to throwing of error message as
>      " 'g' packet message reply is too long".

Please make the description of the problem reasonably succinct.  A detailed
analysis of how you identified the problem is not needed, especially when you
mention the error message and the cause of the error multiple times.

What is running on the target?

If this a problem using the XMD gdbserver stub which is returning more registers
than GDB expects?  If that is the case, then say so.  Otherwise, what is the cause
of the mismatch between the gdb G packet and the target?




>      ChangeLog:
>      2014-05-20 Ajit Agarwal <ajitkum@xilinx.com>
>
>          * gdb/gdbserver/Makefile.in (microblaze-linux.c): New rule.
>
>          * gdb/microblaze-tdep.c (microblaze_register_names): Added
>          the rshr and rslr register names.
>
>          * gdb/microblaze-tdep.h (microblaze_reg_num): Addition of
>          field MICROBLAZE_SLR_REGNUM and MICROBLAZE_SHR_REGNUM.
>          (microblaze_frame_cache): Change in the index of
>          register_offsets.
>
>          * gdb/regformats/reg-microblaze.dat: New Register data file.
>
>      Signed-off-by:Ajit Agarwal ajitkum@xilinx.com
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Ajit
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joel Brobecker [mailto:brobecker@adacore.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 7:16 PM
> To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal
> Cc: Michael Eager; Michael Eager; gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Vinod Kathail; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
> Subject: Re: [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs and little-endian breakpoint
>
> > Here is the problem  description. The problem is related to
> > process_g_packet where the buf_len > 2 * rsa->sizeof_g_packet and
> > throwing the Error that 'g' packet message reply is too long. This is
> > because the buf_len calculated in the init_remote_state function for
> > microblaze target is based On the sizeof_g_packet and
> > remote_packet_size and the memory_packet_config->size. The
> > sizeof_g_packet is 236 because the number of reg num is 59 and 2*
> > sizeof_g_packet comes to 472 .With shr and shl entry and the buf_len
> > is 472. This does not match the greater than conditional statement and
> > works fine. Without shr and shl entry,the sizeof_g_packets comes to
> > 57*4 *2 = 456.  This doesn't match the criteria in the
> > process_g_packet function leading to throwing of error message as  "
> > 'g' packet message reply is too long".
> >
> > This is happening when tar remote machine:1234 command is run in gdb.
> >
> > > > > These changes don't appear related.  Split independent changes in
> > > > > to separate patches.
> >
> > I will split the changes  and send the separate patch with shr and shl
> > reg changes and the little endian breakpoint support.
>
> Thanks, Ajit. FWIW, I agree with Michael.
>
> Also, when submitting the new patches, please include the description of the problem you are trying to solve in the revision log of your patch. Something like the description you gave above, for instance.
> This makes archeology a lot easier for us.  The good news when doing that is that submitting the patch could be as simple as "git send-email"-ing the patch; that's what I personally do for my own patches, and it's been a real time saver.
>
> --
> Joel


--
Michael Eager	 eager@eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306  650-325-8077